EQR vs ESS Stock Comparison
EQR currently leads ESS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 48 vs 45. The clearest difference is value, while ESS has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between EQR and ESS?
EQR leads the current stock comparison as Equity Residential, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Equity Residential vs Essex Property Trust, Inc.
EQR leads
EQR leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Value.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support EQR.
Equity Residential
Essex Property Trust, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EQR over ESS, 48 versus 45 as of Oct 22, 2026. EQR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while ESS holds the stronger risk resilience profile. EQR also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EQR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. EQR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Equity Residential and Essex Property Trust, 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 EQR and ESS 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.
- Value50 vs 28EQR +22
- Risk Resilience46 vs 54ESS +8
- Quality47 vs 49Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor EQR. EQR’s edge is concentrated in value; ESS keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session.
Largest factor move: Momentum +24
New signals
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
EQR's lead narrowed by 6 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — EQR and ESS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EQR (Equity Residential): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
ESS (Essex Property Trust, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, 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
EQREQR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EQREQR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EQREQR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
ESSESS on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
EQREQR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | EQR | ESS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13.5% | +9.7% | EQR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +18% | +26.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 14 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | EQR | ESS |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 2.69% | 4.10% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.411 | $8.311 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.753 | $10.160 |
| Years increased | 4 | 4 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
ESS grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 4.10% a year against EQR's 2.69%.
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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EQR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 48 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | ESSon balance | revenue growth 0.7% vs 0.9%; EPS growth 25% vs -41.2%; TTM ROE 8.1% vs 7.6%; gross margin 46% vs 69.4%; operating margin 28.1% vs 29.1% — ESS takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EQR | Value 50 vs 28 |
| Technicals | ESS | Price vs 50-day -5.6% vs -0.9%; vs 200-day 0.3% vs 1.1% |
| Risk Resilience | ESS | Risk Resilience 46 vs 54 |
| Analyst expectations | EQR | Target upside 13.5% vs 9.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of EQR and ESS 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 narrow at 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 EQR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20EQR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- EQR +3
- 48 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- EQR +5
- 48 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- EQR +4
- 48 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- ESS +1
- 42 vs 43
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Aug 28 when ESS moved ahead of EQR.
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.
No active signals
No signal that the other name lacks.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only ESS
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.78%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
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 +0.75%, AIQ +6 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.
- 1ESS closes the Value gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to EQR's edge.
- 2ESS's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3EQR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
ESS leads on balance| Metric | EQR | ESS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.7% | 0.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 25% | -41.2% |
| Gross margin | 46% | 69.4% |
| Operating margin | 28.1% | 29.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.1% | 7.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.81 | 1.27 |
Performance
ESS leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | EQR | ESS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.3% | 0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.5% | -1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -0.3% | -7.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -0.3% | 7.5% |
| Year to date | 1% | 4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -0.5% | 5.6% |
Technicals
ESS has the stronger structure| Metric | EQR | ESS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 32.1 | 55 |
| ADX (14) | 15.2 | 17.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.6% | -0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.3% | 1.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.6% | 14.5% |
Risk
ESS is the more resilient| Metric | EQR | ESS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.11 | 0.12 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.22 | 0.14 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.34 | 0.19 |
| Max drawdown | -11.7% | -10.6% |
| Current drawdown | -9.3% | -8.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 20.5% | 19.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.2% | -2.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, EQR or ESS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EQR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 48 against ESS's 45. The edge comes from value. ESS 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 EQR or ESS the better buy right now?
EQR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor EQR over ESS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. EQR leads Value by 22 points; ESS leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, EQR or ESS?
Analyst price targets imply +13.5% upside for EQR and +9.7% for ESS, so the Street currently favors EQR. 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, EQR or ESS?
EQR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EQR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 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, EQR or ESS?
EQR 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, EQR or ESS?
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, EQR or ESS?
ESS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ESS on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 EQR more profitable than ESS?
ESS leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 46% vs 69.4%; operating margin 28.1% vs 29.1%; ttm roe 8.1% vs 7.6%.
Is EQR's lead over ESS getting stronger or weaker?
EQR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-28, when ESS moved ahead of EQR.
What would change the EQR vs ESS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ESS closes the Value gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to EQR's edge; ESS's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; EQR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 EQR and ESS?
EQR: No active signals. ESS: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. On ESS it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare EQR and ESS 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.