ESS vs INVH Stock Comparison
INVH currently leads ESS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 49 vs 45. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while ESS has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between ESS and INVH?
INVH leads the current stock comparison as Invitation Homes Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Essex Property Trust, Inc. vs Invitation Homes Inc.
INVH leads
INVH leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from ESS.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support INVH, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Essex Property Trust, Inc.
Invitation Homes Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors INVH over ESS, 49 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. INVH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while ESS holds the stronger quality profile. INVH also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INVH today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. INVH lead: Reversed — ESS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; INVH now leads by 4.
Compare Essex Property Trust, Inc. and Invitation Homes 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 ESS and INVH 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 Resilience54 vs 73INVH +19
- Value28 vs 43INVH +15
- Quality49 vs 43ESS +6
- Momentum54 vs 50ESS +4
5 of 6 evidence groups favor INVH. INVH’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; ESS keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +24
New signals
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
INVH's lead narrowed by 5 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ESS and INVH both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
INVH (Invitation Homes Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
ESS (Essex Property Trust, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, momentum, 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
INVHINVH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
INVHINVH on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
INVHINVH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
ESSESS on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
INVHINVH on Risk Resilience, by 19 points.
Analyst upside
INVHINVH 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 | ESS | INVH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +9.7% | +17.2% | INVH has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.6% | +25.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 14 | 12 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | ESS | INVH |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 4.10% | 14.29% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $8.311 | $0.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $10.160 | $1.170 |
| Years increased | 4 | 4 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
INVH grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 14.29% a year against ESS's 4.10%.
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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INVH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | INVH | 45 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | INVHon balance | revenue growth 0.9% vs 1.8%; EPS growth -41.2% vs 42.3%; TTM ROE 7.6% vs 7.1%; gross margin 69.4% vs 44.4%; operating margin 29.1% vs 30.2% — INVH takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | INVH | Value 28 vs 43 |
| Technicals | ESS | Price vs 50-day -0.9% vs -4%; vs 200-day 1.1% vs -2.9% |
| Risk Resilience | INVH | Risk Resilience 54 vs 73 |
| Analyst expectations | INVH | Target upside 9.7% vs 17.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ESS and INVH 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 narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 INVH.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20INVH lead: Reversed — ESS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; INVH now leads by 4.
- Today
- INVH +4
- 45 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- INVH +5
- 43 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- ESS +1
- 44 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- INVH +3
- 43 vs 46
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Sep 29 when ESS moved ahead of INVH.
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.
ESS and INVH carry the same 3 signals, so the signals do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
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).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.7%, 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.
- 1ESS closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to INVH's edge.
- 2ESS's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3INVH'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
INVH leads on balance| Metric | ESS | INVH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.9% | 1.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -41.2% | 42.3% |
| Gross margin | 69.4% | 44.4% |
| Operating margin | 29.1% | 30.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.6% | 7.1% |
| Debt to equity | 1.27 | 0.94 |
Performance
ESS leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ESS | INVH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.1% | 1.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1% | -0.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.2% | -8.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.5% | 0.2% |
| Year to date | 4% | -2.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 5.6% | -5.1% |
Technicals
ESS has the stronger structure| Metric | ESS | INVH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 55 | 59.1 |
| ADX (14) | 17.3 | 35.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.9% | -4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.1% | -2.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 14.5% | 17.9% |
Risk
INVH is the more resilient| Metric | ESS | INVH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.12 | 0.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.14 | -0.34 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.19 | -0.53 |
| Max drawdown | -10.6% | -15.6% |
| Current drawdown | -8.8% | -11.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 19.8% | 21.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ESS or INVH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, INVH is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 49 against ESS's 45. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. ESS is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 ESS or INVH the better buy right now?
INVH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 5 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 INVH over ESS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. INVH leads Risk Resilience by 19 points; INVH leads Value by 15 points; ESS leads Quality by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ESS or INVH?
Analyst price targets imply +9.7% upside for ESS and +17.2% for INVH, so the Street currently favors INVH. 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, ESS or INVH?
INVH is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. INVH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, ESS or INVH?
INVH 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, ESS or INVH?
ESS on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, ESS or INVH?
INVH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. INVH on Risk Resilience, by 19 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 ESS more profitable than INVH?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 69.4% vs 44.4%; operating margin 29.1% vs 30.2%; ttm roe 7.6% vs 7.1%. ESS leads on two measures and INVH on one measure, 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 INVH's lead over ESS getting stronger or weaker?
INVH lead: Reversed — ESS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; INVH now leads by 4. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-29, when ESS moved ahead of INVH.
What would change the ESS vs INVH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ESS closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to INVH's edge; ESS's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; INVH'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 ESS and INVH?
ESS: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. INVH: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on ESS is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On INVH it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ESS and INVH 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.