ED vs EIX Stock Comparison
Compare ED and EIX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ED and EIX?
ED leads the current stock comparison as Consolidated Edison, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Consolidated Edison, Inc. vs Edison International
ED leads
ED leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 2 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors EIX on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ED, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Consolidated Edison, Inc.
Edison International
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ED over EIX, 49 versus 42 as of Sep 11, 2026. ED's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while EIX holds the stronger value profile. ED also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors EIX. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ED today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. ED lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Consolidated Edison, Inc. and Edison International 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 ED and EIX 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.
- Risk Resilience56 vs 29ED +27
- Momentum37 vs 19ED +18
- Value54 vs 71EIX +17
- Quality52 vs 40ED +12
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ED. ED’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; EIX keeps a meaningful value 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 -10
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
ED's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ED and EIX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ED (Consolidated Edison, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
EIX (Edison International): the counter-case, on value, fundamentals, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 98.6% against 14.2%.
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
EDED on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EIXEIX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EIXEIX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
EDED on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
EDED on Risk Resilience, by 27 points.
Analyst upside
EIXEIX on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ED, analyst targets favor EIX. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ED | EIX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -1.4% | +29.9% | EIX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +21% | +33% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 6 | 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 ED. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ED | 49 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | EIXon balance | revenue growth -20.1% vs 6.2%; TTM ROE 8.9% vs 22.1%; gross margin 76% vs 39.9%; operating margin 18% vs 23.2% — EIX takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EIX | Value 54 vs 71 |
| Technicals | ED | Price vs 50-day -2.8% vs -21.7%; vs 200-day -0.5% vs -17.1% |
| Risk Resilience | ED | Risk Resilience 56 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | EIX | Target upside -1.4% vs 29.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ED and EIX 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 moderate at 7 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 ED.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ED lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ED +7
- 49 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- ED +8
- 51 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- ED +2
- 51 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 59 vs 59
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 28 when ED moved ahead of EIX.
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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.97%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.42%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
EIX 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 -0.25%, AIQ -3 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.32%, AIQ -1 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.
- 1EIX closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to ED's edge.
- 2EIX's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3ED's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
EIX leads on balance| Metric | ED | EIX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -20.1% | 6.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -67.5% | 0.7% |
| Gross margin | 76% | 39.9% |
| Operating margin | 18% | 23.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.9% | 22.1% |
| Debt to equity | 1.1 | 2.48 |
Performance
ED leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | ED | EIX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.9% | 2.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1% | -17.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -0.8% | -20.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -4.5% | -20.7% |
| Year to date | 7.5% | -5.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 10.4% | 6.5% |
Technicals
ED has the stronger structure| Metric | ED | EIX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44.1 | 28.8 |
| ADX (14) | 10.4 | 29.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.8% | -21.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.5% | -17.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 14.2% | 98.6% |
Risk
ED is the more resilient| Metric | ED | EIX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.49 | 0.04 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.42 | 0.19 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.71 | 0.18 |
| Max drawdown | -10.4% | -32.8% |
| Current drawdown | -7.6% | -29.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.3% | 36.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -3.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ED or EIX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ED is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against EIX's 42. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. EIX is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 ED or EIX the better buy right now?
ED 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 ED over EIX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ED leads Risk Resilience by 27 points; ED leads Momentum by 18 points; EIX leads Value by 17 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ED or EIX?
Analyst price targets imply -1.4% upside for ED and +29.9% for EIX, so the Street currently favors EIX. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ED. 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, ED or EIX?
EIX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EIX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 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, ED or EIX?
EIX 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, ED or EIX?
ED on the Momentum factor, by 18 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, ED or EIX?
ED is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ED on Risk Resilience, by 27 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 ED more profitable than EIX?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 76% vs 39.9%; operating margin 18% vs 23.2%; ttm roe 8.9% vs 22.1%. ED leads on one measure and EIX on two measures, 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 ED's lead over EIX getting stronger or weaker?
ED lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 7 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-28, when ED moved ahead of EIX.
What would change the ED vs EIX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: EIX closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to ED's edge; EIX's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; ED's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 ED and EIX?
ED: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. EIX: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 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 ED is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On EIX it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ED and EIX 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.