DNN vs LTBR Stock Comparison
LTBR currently leads DNN in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 34 vs 26. The clearest difference is quality, while DNN has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between DNN and LTBR?
LTBR leads the current stock comparison as Lightbridge Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Denison Mines Corp. vs Lightbridge Corporation
LTBR leads
LTBR leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 12 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support LTBR, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Denison Mines Corp.
Lightbridge Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LTBR over DNN, 34 versus 26 as of Oct 31, 2026. LTBR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while DNN holds the stronger momentum profile. LTBR also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor LTBR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. LTBR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Denison Mines Corp. and Lightbridge Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare DNN and LTBR 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.
- Quality0 vs 30LTBR +30
- Momentum43 vs 34DNN +9
- Risk Resilience36 vs 40LTBR +4
2 of 4 evidence groups favor LTBR. LTBR’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; DNN keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
LTBR's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DNN and LTBR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LTBR (Lightbridge Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
DNN (Denison Mines Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals.
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
LTBRLTBR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DNNDNN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
DNNDNN on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
LTBRLTBR on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | DNN | LTBR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +92.3% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | 0% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 0 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor LTBR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | LTBR | 26 vs 34 |
| Fundamentals | Even | EPS growth 121.8% vs 10%; TTM ROE -83.5% vs -11.5% |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | DNN | Price vs 50-day -21.6% vs -23.2%; vs 200-day -28.1% vs -46.9% |
| Risk Resilience | LTBR | Risk Resilience 36 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DNN and LTBR 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 moderate at 8 points.
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 LTBR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28LTBR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LTBR +8
- 26 vs 34
- 7 sessions ago
- LTBR +9
- 22 vs 31
- 30 sessions ago
- LTBR +12
- 22 vs 34
- 90 sessions ago
- DNN +3
- 35 vs 32
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only LTBR
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
LTBR 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -6.75%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -5.93%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1DNN closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to LTBR's edge.
- 2DNN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3LTBR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate LTBR's advantage entirely.
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
Split| Metric | DNN | LTBR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -34.9% | 0% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 121.8% | 10% |
| Gross margin | -14.1% | 0% |
| Operating margin | -21% | 0% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -83.5% | -11.5% |
| Debt to equity | 2.38 | 0 |
Performance
DNN leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | DNN | LTBR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3% | 0.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.3% | -13.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -17.8% | -35.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -33.3% | -52.2% |
| Year to date | -9.8% | -57% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -14.6% | -78.5% |
Technicals
DNN has the stronger structure| Metric | DNN | LTBR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.8 | 40.5 |
| ADX (14) | 30.8 | 31.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -21.6% | -23.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -28.1% | -46.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 74.2% | 79% |
Risk
LTBR is the more resilient| Metric | DNN | LTBR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.44 | 3.91 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.14 | -1.43 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.24 | -2.18 |
| Max drawdown | -50.6% | -82.1% |
| Current drawdown | -45.1% | -80.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 62.8% | 83.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.4% | -8.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DNN or LTBR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LTBR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 34 against DNN's 26. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. DNN is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 DNN or LTBR the better buy right now?
LTBR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LTBR over DNN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LTBR leads Quality by 30 points; DNN leads Momentum by 9 points; LTBR leads Risk Resilience by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DNN or LTBR?
Analyst price targets imply +92.3% upside for DNN and not covered for LTBR. 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, DNN or LTBR?
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, DNN or LTBR?
DNN 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, DNN or LTBR?
DNN on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, DNN or LTBR?
LTBR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LTBR on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 DNN more profitable than LTBR?
LTBR leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin -14.1% vs 0%; operating margin -21% vs 0%; ttm roe -83.5% vs -11.5%.
Is LTBR's lead over DNN getting stronger or weaker?
LTBR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the DNN vs LTBR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DNN closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to LTBR's edge; DNN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; LTBR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate LTBR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about DNN and LTBR?
DNN: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. LTBR: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, 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 DNN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On LTBR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare DNN and LTBR 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.