ENOV vs HAYW Stock Comparison
Compare ENOV and HAYW across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ENOV and HAYW?
HAYW leads the current stock comparison as Hayward Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Enovis Corporation vs Hayward Holdings, Inc.
HAYW leads
HAYW leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors ENOV on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support HAYW, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Enovis Corporation
Hayward Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HAYW over ENOV, 55 versus 47 as of Sep 11, 2026. HAYW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while ENOV holds the stronger value profile. HAYW also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ENOV. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HAYW today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. HAYW lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Enovis Corporation and Hayward Holdings, 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 ENOV and HAYW 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 Resilience40 vs 75HAYW +35
- Quality42 vs 60HAYW +18
- Value74 vs 64ENOV +10
- Momentum24 vs 25Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor HAYW. HAYW’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; ENOV 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.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
HAYW's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ENOV and HAYW both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HAYW (Hayward Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
ENOV (Enovis Corporation): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 77.6% against 26.6%.
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
HAYWHAYW on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HAYWHAYW on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ENOVENOV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
HAYWHAYW on Risk Resilience, by 35 points.
Analyst upside
ENOVENOV on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors HAYW, analyst targets favor ENOV. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ENOV | HAYW | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +85.4% | +37.3% | ENOV has more room |
| Target dispersion | +67.1% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HAYW. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | HAYW | 47 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | HAYWon balance | revenue growth -1.1% vs 24.7%; EPS growth 86.7% vs 90.9%; TTM ROE -68.2% vs 10.2%; gross margin 57.4% vs 44.6%; operating margin 4.1% vs 21.2% — HAYW takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ENOV | Value 74 vs 64 |
| Technicals | HAYW | Price vs 50-day -23.9% vs -12.3%; vs 200-day -24.8% vs -14.9% |
| Risk Resilience | HAYW | Risk Resilience 40 vs 75 |
| Analyst expectations | ENOV | Target upside 85.4% vs 37.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ENOV and HAYW 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 8 points.
- 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 HAYW.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10HAYW lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- HAYW +8
- 47 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- HAYW +9
- 47 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- HAYW +3
- 54 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- HAYW +8
- 58 vs 66
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jul 30 when HAYW moved ahead of ENOV.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.93%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.49%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
HAYW 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +4.73%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.79%, 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.
- 1ENOV closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to HAYW's edge.
- 2ENOV's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3HAYW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 5 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
HAYW leads on balance| Metric | ENOV | HAYW |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -1.1% | 24.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 86.7% | 90.9% |
| Gross margin | 57.4% | 44.6% |
| Operating margin | 4.1% | 21.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -68.2% | 10.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.93 | 0.01 |
Performance
HAYW leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | ENOV | HAYW |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -8.9% | -5.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -25.4% | -15.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -16.2% | -8.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -25.9% | -11.4% |
| Year to date | -27% | -14.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -41% | -19.3% |
Technicals
HAYW has the stronger structure| Metric | ENOV | HAYW |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 16.7 | 14.1 |
| ADX (14) | 24.5 | 25.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -23.9% | -12.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -24.8% | -14.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 77.6% | 26.6% |
Risk
HAYW is the more resilient| Metric | ENOV | HAYW |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.49 | 1.1 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.58 | -0.55 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.86 | -0.9 |
| Max drawdown | -44.8% | -25.6% |
| Current drawdown | -44.8% | -25.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 63.2% | 33% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.3% | -3.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ENOV or HAYW?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HAYW is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 55 against ENOV's 47. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. ENOV 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 ENOV or HAYW the better buy right now?
HAYW carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 HAYW over ENOV?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HAYW leads Risk Resilience by 35 points; HAYW leads Quality by 18 points; ENOV leads Value by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ENOV or HAYW?
Analyst price targets imply +85.4% upside for ENOV and +37.3% for HAYW, so the Street currently favors ENOV. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors HAYW. 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, ENOV or HAYW?
ENOV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ENOV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, ENOV or HAYW?
HAYW 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, ENOV or HAYW?
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, ENOV or HAYW?
HAYW is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HAYW on Risk Resilience, by 35 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 ENOV more profitable than HAYW?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 57.4% vs 44.6%; operating margin 4.1% vs 21.2%; ttm roe -68.2% vs 10.2%. ENOV leads on one measure and HAYW 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 HAYW's lead over ENOV getting stronger or weaker?
HAYW lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 8 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 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-30, when HAYW moved ahead of ENOV.
What would change the ENOV vs HAYW verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ENOV closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to HAYW's edge; ENOV's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; HAYW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 5 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 ENOV and HAYW?
ENOV: 2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. HAYW: 2 bullish / 5 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 ENOV is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On HAYW it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ENOV and HAYW 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.