DHR vs EXAS Stock Comparison
Compare DHR and EXAS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between DHR and EXAS?
EXAS leads the current stock comparison as Exact Sciences Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Danaher Corporation vs Exact Sciences Corporation
EXAS leads
EXAS leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from DHR. Wall Street currently favors DHR on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support EXAS, and the lead recently changed hands.
Danaher Corporation
Exact Sciences Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EXAS over DHR, 46 versus 42 as of Sep 11, 2026. EXAS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience, while DHR holds the stronger quality profile. EXAS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors DHR. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EXAS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. EXAS lead: Reversed — DHR led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EXAS now leads by 4.
Compare Danaher Corporation and Exact Sciences Corporation 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 DHR and EXAS 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.
- Quality56 vs 44DHR +12
- Risk Resilience59 vs 67EXAS +8
- Value37 vs 37Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor EXAS. EXAS’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience; DHR keeps a meaningful quality edge.
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 -29
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
The lead changed hands: EXAS moved ahead of DHR in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DHR and EXAS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EXAS (Exact Sciences Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience.
DHR (Danaher Corporation): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 30.5% against 4.2%.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
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
EXASEXAS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EXASEXAS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
EXASEXAS on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
DHRDHR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors EXAS, analyst targets favor DHR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | DHR | EXAS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +9.9% | +0.1% | DHR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +24.6% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 12 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EXAS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | EXAS | 42 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | DHRon balance | revenue growth 5.3% vs 3.2%; EPS growth -15.2% vs -3.5%; TTM ROE 7.7% vs -8.5%; gross margin 58.5% vs 69.7%; operating margin 20.4% vs -6.2% — DHR takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 37 vs 37 |
| Technicals | EXAS | Price vs 50-day -1% vs 1.8%; vs 200-day -1% vs 41.3% |
| Risk Resilience | EXAS | Risk Resilience 59 vs 67 |
| Analyst expectations | DHR | Target upside 9.9% vs 0.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DHR and EXAS and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 EXAS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10EXAS lead: Reversed — DHR led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EXAS now leads by 4.
- Today
- EXAS +4
- 42 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- DHR +7
- 53 vs 46
- 30 sessions ago
- DHR +9
- 55 vs 46
- 90 sessions ago
- DHR +8
- 54 vs 46
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Sep 10 when EXAS moved ahead of DHR.
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.
2 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.14%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
No active signals
DHR is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.19%, AIQ -7 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.
- 1DHR closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to EXAS's edge.
- 2DHR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3EXAS starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
DHR leads on balance| Metric | DHR | EXAS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.3% | 3.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -15.2% | -3.5% |
| Gross margin | 58.5% | 69.7% |
| Operating margin | 20.4% | -6.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.7% | -8.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.51 | 1.05 |
Performance
EXAS leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | DHR | EXAS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.5% | 1.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.6% | 1.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 9.2% | 3.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 2.8% | 100.3% |
| Year to date | -12.4% | 3.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 1% | 133.5% |
Technicals
EXAS has the stronger structure| Metric | DHR | EXAS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 26.4 | 74.1 |
| ADX (14) | 17 | 42.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1% | 1.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1% | 41.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.5% | 4.2% |
Risk
EXAS is the more resilient| Metric | DHR | EXAS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.43 | -0.02 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.13 | 3.07 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.2 | 6.11 |
| Max drawdown | -33.1% | -12.8% |
| Current drawdown | -17.1% | 0% |
| Annualized volatility | 31.5% | 44.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -1.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DHR or EXAS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EXAS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 46 against DHR's 42. The edge comes from risk resilience. DHR is not without a case — it holds the better quality profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. 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 DHR or EXAS the better buy right now?
EXAS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor EXAS over DHR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DHR leads Quality by 12 points; EXAS leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DHR or EXAS?
Analyst price targets imply +9.9% upside for DHR and +0.1% for EXAS, so the Street currently favors DHR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors EXAS. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, DHR or EXAS?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, DHR or EXAS?
EXAS 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, DHR or EXAS?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, DHR or EXAS?
EXAS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. EXAS on Risk Resilience, by 8 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is DHR more profitable than EXAS?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 58.5% vs 69.7%; operating margin 20.4% vs -6.2%; ttm roe 7.7% vs -8.5%. DHR leads on two measures and EXAS 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 EXAS's lead over DHR getting stronger or weaker?
EXAS lead: Reversed — DHR led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EXAS now leads by 4. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-10, when EXAS moved ahead of DHR.
What would change the DHR vs EXAS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DHR closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to EXAS's edge; DHR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; EXAS starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 DHR and EXAS?
DHR: 2 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted. EXAS: No active signals. 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 DHR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare DHR and EXAS 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.