ENTG vs EQIX Stock Comparison
ENTG currently leads EQIX in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 48 vs 38. The clearest difference is value, while EQIX has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between ENTG and EQIX?
ENTG leads the current stock comparison as Entegris, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Entegris, Inc. vs Equinix, Inc.
ENTG leads
ENTG leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 14 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors EQIX on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ENTG, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Entegris, Inc.
Equinix, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ENTG over EQIX, 48 versus 38 as of Oct 31, 2026. ENTG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while EQIX holds the stronger risk resilience profile. ENTG also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors EQIX. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ENTG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. ENTG lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Entegris, Inc. and Equinix, 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 ENTG and EQIX 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.
- Value44 vs 25ENTG +19
- Momentum59 vs 43ENTG +16
- Risk Resilience45 vs 55EQIX +10
- Quality45 vs 40ENTG +5
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ENTG. ENTG’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; EQIX keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 +11
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +14
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
ENTG's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ENTG and EQIX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ENTG (Entegris, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
EQIX (Equinix, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, analyst expectations.
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
ENTGENTG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EQIXEQIX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ENTGENTG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 points.
Momentum
ENTGENTG on the Momentum factor, by 16 points.
Lower downside
EQIXEQIX on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
EQIXEQIX on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ENTG, analyst targets favor EQIX. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ENTG | EQIX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20.8% | +22.6% | EQIX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.8% | +21.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 12 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | ENTG | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 4.56% | 12.01% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.320 | $10.640 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.400 | $18.760 |
| Years increased | 1 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #262 | #6 |
EQIX grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 12.01% a year against ENTG's 4.56%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window. They are ranked in different cohorts — US dividend-paying corporations and REITs — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ENTG. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ENTG | 48 vs 38 |
| Fundamentals | EQIXon balance | revenue growth 8.8% vs 7.4%; EPS growth 1.7% vs 15.2%; TTM ROE 7.6% vs 10.8%; gross margin 45.5% vs 51.6%; operating margin 30% vs 21.8% — EQIX takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ENTG | Value 44 vs 25 |
| Technicals | ENTG | Price vs 50-day 5.9% vs -1.1%; vs 200-day 15.7% vs -0.1% |
| Risk Resilience | EQIX | Risk Resilience 45 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | EQIX | Target upside 20.8% vs 22.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ENTG and EQIX 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 10 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 ENTG.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28ENTG lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ENTG +10
- 48 vs 38
- 7 sessions ago
- ENTG +7
- 37 vs 30
- 30 sessions ago
- ENTG +14
- 56 vs 42
- 90 sessions ago
- EQIX +2
- 43 vs 45
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 28 when ENTG moved ahead of EQIX.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only ENTG
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.48%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish
Only EQIX
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
ENTG 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 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -3.51%, AIQ +3 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -2.22%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1EQIX closes the Value gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to ENTG's edge.
- 2EQIX generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3ENTG's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 10-point move would eliminate ENTG'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
EQIX leads on balance| Metric | ENTG | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.8% | 7.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 1.7% | 15.2% |
| Gross margin | 45.5% | 51.6% |
| Operating margin | 30% | 21.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.6% | 10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.86 | 1.62 |
Performance
ENTG leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | ENTG | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 7.9% | 1.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.4% | -0.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 36% | -3.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.7% | -7.5% |
| Year to date | 89.1% | 31.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 74.1% | 20% |
Technicals
ENTG has the stronger structure| Metric | ENTG | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.5 | 49.1 |
| ADX (14) | 18.7 | 23.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 5.9% | -1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 15.7% | -0.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 78% | 27.9% |
Risk
EQIX is the more resilient| Metric | ENTG | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.36 | 0.56 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.09 | 0.8 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.69 | 1.4 |
| Max drawdown | -41.8% | -14.6% |
| Current drawdown | -13.4% | -9.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 69.2% | 25.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ENTG or EQIX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ENTG is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 48 against EQIX's 38. The edge comes from value and momentum. EQIX 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 ENTG or EQIX the better buy right now?
ENTG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ENTG over EQIX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ENTG leads Value by 19 points; ENTG leads Momentum by 16 points; EQIX leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ENTG or EQIX?
Analyst price targets imply +20.8% upside for ENTG and +22.6% for EQIX, so the Street currently favors EQIX. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ENTG. 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, ENTG or EQIX?
ENTG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ENTG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 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, ENTG or EQIX?
EQIX 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, ENTG or EQIX?
ENTG on the Momentum factor, by 16 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, ENTG or EQIX?
EQIX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. EQIX 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 ENTG more profitable than EQIX?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 45.5% vs 51.6%; operating margin 30% vs 21.8%; ttm roe 7.6% vs 10.8%. ENTG leads on one measure and EQIX 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 ENTG's lead over EQIX getting stronger or weaker?
ENTG lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 10 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-28, when ENTG moved ahead of EQIX.
What would change the ENTG vs EQIX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: EQIX closes the Value gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to ENTG's edge; EQIX generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; ENTG's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 10-point move would eliminate ENTG's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ENTG and EQIX?
ENTG: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. EQIX: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. 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 ENTG is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On EQIX it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ENTG and EQIX 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.