DKS vs GAP Stock Comparison
Compare DKS and GAP across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between DKS and GAP?
GAP leads the current stock comparison as The Gap, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc. vs The Gap, Inc.
GAP leads
GAP leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 5 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors DKS on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support GAP, and its lead is widening.
DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc.
The Gap, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GAP over DKS, 58 versus 44 as of Sep 11, 2026. GAP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while DKS holds the stronger risk resilience profile. GAP also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors DKS. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GAP today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. GAP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc. and The Gap, 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 DKS and GAP 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.
- Momentum23 vs 61GAP +38
- Quality39 vs 61GAP +22
- Risk Resilience39 vs 29DKS +10
- Value69 vs 67Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor GAP. GAP’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; DKS keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 +4
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
GAP's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DKS and GAP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GAP (The Gap, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
DKS (DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 115.7% against 59.6%.
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
GAPGAP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
GAPGAP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
GAPGAP on the Momentum factor, by 38 points.
Lower downside
DKSDKS on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
DKSDKS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors GAP, analyst targets favor DKS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | DKS | GAP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +40.1% | +17.3% | DKS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +106.2% | +87.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 8 | 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 GAP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | GAP | 44 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | GAPon balance | revenue growth 8.2% vs 4.4%; EPS growth -1.7% vs 53.3%; TTM ROE 15% vs 33.1%; gross margin 32.1% vs 43.3%; operating margin 6.8% vs 11% — GAP takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 69 vs 67 |
| Technicals | GAP | Price vs 50-day -28.6% vs 5.5%; vs 200-day -35.5% vs -12.5% |
| Risk Resilience | DKS | Risk Resilience 39 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | DKS | Target upside 40.1% vs 17.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DKS and GAP 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)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 GAP.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10GAP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GAP +14
- 44 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- GAP +19
- 41 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- GAP +5
- 47 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- DKS +2
- 50 vs 48
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Jun 11 when DKS moved ahead of GAP.
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.
1 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (9.02%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (17.18%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.23%)
DKS 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 up over the latest session (price +1.42%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.87%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1DKS closes the Momentum gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to GAP's edge.
- 2DKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3GAP 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
GAP leads on balance| Metric | DKS | GAP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.2% | 4.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -1.7% | 53.3% |
| Gross margin | 32.1% | 43.3% |
| Operating margin | 6.8% | 11% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 15% | 33.1% |
| Debt to equity | 1.39 | 1.45 |
Performance
GAP leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | DKS | GAP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.1% | -5.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -34.3% | 3.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -38.1% | -0.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -31.9% | -11.2% |
| Year to date | -32.7% | -18.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -40.5% | -13.4% |
Technicals
GAP has the stronger structure| Metric | DKS | GAP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 24.7 | 57.5 |
| ADX (14) | 41.6 | 24.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -28.6% | 5.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -35.5% | -12.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 115.7% | 59.6% |
Risk
DKS is the more resilient| Metric | DKS | GAP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.99 | 1.2 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.87 | -0.15 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.93 | -0.2 |
| Max drawdown | -48% | -37% |
| Current drawdown | -44.3% | -28.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 48% | 47.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -3.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DKS or GAP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GAP is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 58 against DKS's 44. The edge comes from momentum and quality. DKS is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 DKS or GAP the better buy right now?
GAP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 GAP over DKS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. GAP leads Momentum by 38 points; GAP leads Quality by 22 points; DKS leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DKS or GAP?
Analyst price targets imply +40.1% upside for DKS and +17.3% for GAP, so the Street currently favors DKS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors GAP. 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, DKS or GAP?
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, DKS or GAP?
GAP 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, DKS or GAP?
GAP on the Momentum factor, by 38 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, DKS or GAP?
DKS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DKS on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 DKS more profitable than GAP?
GAP leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 32.1% vs 43.3%; operating margin 6.8% vs 11%; ttm roe 15% vs 33.1%.
Is GAP's lead over DKS getting stronger or weaker?
GAP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 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 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-11, when DKS moved ahead of GAP.
What would change the DKS vs GAP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DKS closes the Momentum gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to GAP's edge; DKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; GAP 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 DKS and GAP?
DKS: 1 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. GAP: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 DKS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On GAP it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare DKS and GAP 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.