DGX vs ELV Stock Comparison
Compare DGX and ELV across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between DGX and ELV?
ELV leads the current stock comparison as Elevance Health Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Quest Diagnostics Incorporated vs Elevance Health Inc.
ELV leads
ELV leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 8 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support ELV, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Quest Diagnostics Incorporated
Elevance Health Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ELV over DGX, 63 versus 49 as of Sep 11, 2026. ELV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value. ELV also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ELV today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. ELV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Quest Diagnostics Incorporated and Elevance Health Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare DGX and ELV against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Momentum40 vs 75ELV +35
- Value53 vs 68ELV +15
- Risk Resilience60 vs 63Even
- Quality47 vs 48Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor ELV. ELV’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +14
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
ELV's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DGX and ELV both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ELV (Elevance Health Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
DGX (Quest Diagnostics Incorporated): the counter-case, on fundamentals.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
ELVELV on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DGXDGX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ELVELV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
ELVELV on the Momentum factor, by 35 points.
Lower downside
DGXDGX carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
ELVELV on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | DGX | ELV | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +1.1% | +4.6% | ELV has more room |
| Target dispersion | +21% | +38.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 16 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ELV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ELV | 49 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | DGXon balance | EPS growth 26.9% vs -16.1%; TTM ROE 14.5% vs 11.2%; gross margin 33.1% vs 39%; operating margin 14.1% vs 3.5% — DGX takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ELV | Value 53 vs 68 |
| Technicals | ELV | Price vs 50-day 2.7% vs 5.4%; vs 200-day 14.5% vs 15.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 60 vs 63 |
| Analyst expectations | ELV | Target upside 1.1% vs 4.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DGX and ELV and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on ELV.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ELV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ELV +14
- 49 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- ELV +10
- 54 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- ELV +8
- 56 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- ELV +3
- 58 vs 61
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 31 when ELV moved ahead of DGX.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.42%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (10.16%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
ELV leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.68%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.52%, AIQ +3 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1DGX closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to ELV's edge.
- 2DGX generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3ELV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
DGX leads on balance| Metric | DGX | ELV |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.1% | 0.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 26.9% | -16.1% |
| Gross margin | 33.1% | 39% |
| Operating margin | 14.1% | 3.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 14.5% | 11.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.85 | 0.69 |
Performance
ELV leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | DGX | ELV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4% | 2.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.8% | 4.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 13.4% | 3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 15.2% | 43.3% |
| Year to date | 33.2% | 18.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 26.6% | 35.2% |
Technicals
ELV has the stronger structure| Metric | DGX | ELV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 31.7 | 62.1 |
| ADX (14) | 28 | 12.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.7% | 5.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 14.5% | 15.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 16.9% | 28% |
Risk
Split| Metric | DGX | ELV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.13 | 0.33 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.94 | 0.86 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.81 | 1.06 |
| Max drawdown | -11.9% | -26.5% |
| Current drawdown | -5.7% | -2.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 23.8% | 35.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DGX or ELV?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ELV is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 63 against DGX's 49. The edge comes from momentum and value. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is DGX or ELV the better buy right now?
ELV carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ELV over DGX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ELV leads Momentum by 35 points; ELV leads Value by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DGX or ELV?
Analyst price targets imply +1.1% upside for DGX and +4.6% for ELV, so the Street currently favors ELV. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, DGX or ELV?
ELV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ELV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, DGX or ELV?
DGX on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, DGX or ELV?
ELV on the Momentum factor, by 35 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, DGX or ELV?
DGX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DGX carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is DGX more profitable than ELV?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 33.1% vs 39%; operating margin 14.1% vs 3.5%; ttm roe 14.5% vs 11.2%. DGX leads on two measures and ELV on one measure, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is ELV's lead over DGX getting stronger or weaker?
ELV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-31, when ELV moved ahead of DGX.
What would change the DGX vs ELV verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DGX closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to ELV's edge; DGX generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; ELV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about DGX and ELV?
DGX: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. ELV: 4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on DGX is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ELV it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DGX and ELV with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.