DNUT vs DRI Stock Comparison
DRI currently leads DNUT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 60 vs 42. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between DNUT and DRI?
DRI leads the current stock comparison as Darden Restaurants, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Krispy Kreme, Inc. vs Darden Restaurants, Inc.
DRI leads
DRI leads by 18 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 8 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors DNUT on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support DRI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Krispy Kreme, Inc.
Darden Restaurants, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DRI over DNUT, 60 versus 42 as of Oct 31, 2026. DRI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality. DRI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors DNUT. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DRI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. DRI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 18 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Krispy Kreme, Inc. and Darden Restaurants, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare DNUT and DRI 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.
- Momentum44 vs 82DRI +38
- Quality40 vs 70DRI +30
- Risk Resilience42 vs 46DRI +4
- Value42 vs 40Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor DRI. DRI’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality.
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 +3
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +3, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
DRI's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DNUT and DRI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DRI (Darden Restaurants, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
DNUT (Krispy Kreme, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 41.3% against 22.8%.
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
DRIDRI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DRIDRI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
DRIDRI on the Momentum factor, by 38 points.
Lower downside
DRIDRI on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
DNUTDNUT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DRI, analyst targets favor DNUT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | DNUT | DRI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +22.1% | +6.7% | DNUT has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +18.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 14 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DRI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DRI | 42 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | DRI | revenue growth -9.8% vs 11.2%; EPS growth 25% vs 33.1%; TTM ROE -14.9% vs 56%; gross margin 46.8% vs 69.4% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 42 vs 40 |
| Technicals | DRI | Price vs 50-day 4.7% vs 4.6%; vs 200-day -8.9% vs 5.3% |
| Risk Resilience | DRI | Risk Resilience 42 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | DNUT | Target upside 22.1% vs 6.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DNUT and DRI 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 18 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 DRI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28DRI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 18 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- DRI +18
- 42 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- DRI +19
- 41 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- DRI +8
- 40 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- DRI +12
- 45 vs 57
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
Only DNUT
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.07%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.81%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only DRI
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.41%)
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
DRI 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.34%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.14%, 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.
- 1DNUT closes the Momentum gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to DRI's edge.
- 2DNUT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3DRI'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
DRI leads on balance| Metric | DNUT | DRI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -9.8% | 11.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 25% | 33.1% |
| Gross margin | 46.8% | 69.4% |
| Operating margin | -1% | 12% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -14.9% | 56% |
| Debt to equity | 0.76 | 2.74 |
Performance
DRI leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | DNUT | DRI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5.9% | 1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 6.3% | 12.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5% | 4.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.4% | 10.3% |
| Year to date | -24.1% | 17.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -23.4% | 16.7% |
Technicals
DRI has the stronger structure| Metric | DNUT | DRI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52.2 | 70.4 |
| ADX (14) | 15 | 17.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.7% | 4.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -8.9% | 5.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 41.3% | 22.8% |
Risk
DRI is the more resilient| Metric | DNUT | DRI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.51 | 0.19 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.26 | 0.64 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.5 | 1.05 |
| Max drawdown | -40% | -15.1% |
| Current drawdown | -35.1% | -4.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 59.2% | 27.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.6% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DNUT or DRI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DRI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 60 against DNUT's 42. The edge comes from momentum and quality. 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 DNUT or DRI the better buy right now?
DRI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 DRI over DNUT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DRI leads Momentum by 38 points; DRI leads Quality by 30 points; DRI leads Risk Resilience by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DNUT or DRI?
Analyst price targets imply +22.1% upside for DNUT and +6.7% for DRI, so the Street currently favors DNUT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DRI. 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, DNUT or DRI?
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, DNUT or DRI?
DRI 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, DNUT or DRI?
DRI 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, DNUT or DRI?
DRI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DRI 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 DNUT more profitable than DRI?
DRI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 46.8% vs 69.4%; operating margin -1% vs 12%; ttm roe -14.9% vs 56%.
Is DRI's lead over DNUT getting stronger or weaker?
DRI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 18 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 DNUT vs DRI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DNUT closes the Momentum gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to DRI's edge; DNUT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; DRI'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 DNUT and DRI?
DNUT: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. DRI: 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 DNUT is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On DRI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DNUT and DRI 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.