EXE vs MGY Stock Comparison
Compare EXE and MGY across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between EXE and MGY?
EXE leads the current stock comparison as Expand Energy Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Expand Energy Corporation vs Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation
EXE leads
EXE leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Value, having only recently taken the lead back from MGY.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support EXE, and the lead recently changed hands.
Expand Energy Corporation
Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EXE over MGY, 60 versus 59 as of Sep 11, 2026. EXE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while MGY holds the stronger quality profile. EXE also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EXE today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. EXE lead: Reversed — MGY led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EXE now leads by 1.
Compare Expand Energy Corporation and Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation 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 EXE and MGY 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.
- Value56 vs 46EXE +10
- Quality70 vs 74MGY +4
- Momentum57 vs 58Even
- Risk Resilience54 vs 55Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor EXE. EXE’s edge is concentrated in value; MGY keeps a meaningful quality 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: Momentum -6
No new signals fired.
EXE's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — EXE and MGY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EXE (Expand Energy Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
MGY (Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 30.1% against 18.7%.
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
EXEEXE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MGYMGY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EXEEXE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
EXEEXE carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
EXEEXE 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 | EXE | MGY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +28.3% | +20.8% | EXE has more room |
| Target dispersion | +39.5% | +26.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 8 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EXE. 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 | 60 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | MGYon balance | revenue growth -32.7% vs 33.6%; EPS growth -54.7% vs 79.6%; TTM ROE 14.7% vs 21.1%; gross margin 63.1% vs 57.6%; operating margin 26% vs 38% — MGY takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EXE | Value 56 vs 46 |
| Technicals | MGY | Price vs 50-day 1.6% vs 6.2%; vs 200-day -3.9% vs 4.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 54 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | EXE | Target upside 28.3% vs 20.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of EXE and MGY 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 EXE.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10EXE lead: Reversed — MGY led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EXE now leads by 1.
- Today
- EXE +1
- 60 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- EXE +3
- 63 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- MGY +1
- 61 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- EXE +6
- 58 vs 52
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Sep 1 when EXE moved ahead of MGY.
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.00%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.75%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
MGY 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.11%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.18%, 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.
- 1MGY closes the Value gap — currently 10 points behind, the largest single contributor to EXE's edge.
- 2MGY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3EXE 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
MGY leads on balance| Metric | EXE | MGY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -32.7% | 33.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -54.7% | 79.6% |
| Gross margin | 63.1% | 57.6% |
| Operating margin | 26% | 38% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 14.7% | 21.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.19 | 0.18 |
Performance
MGY leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | EXE | MGY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.5% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.6% | 5.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 9.4% | -0.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -10.8% | -4.7% |
| Year to date | -12.2% | 26.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 2.5% | 18.2% |
Technicals
MGY has the stronger structure| Metric | EXE | MGY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.5 | 45.5 |
| ADX (14) | 13.5 | 9.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.6% | 6.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.9% | 4.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.7% | 30.1% |
Risk
Split| Metric | EXE | MGY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.01 | -0.43 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.1 | 0.57 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.17 | 0.83 |
| Max drawdown | -29.3% | -27.7% |
| Current drawdown | -21.2% | -14.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 30.9% | 32.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, EXE or MGY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EXE is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 60 against MGY's 59. The edge comes from value. MGY 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 EXE or MGY the better buy right now?
EXE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor EXE over MGY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. EXE leads Value by 10 points; MGY leads Quality by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, EXE or MGY?
Analyst price targets imply +28.3% upside for EXE and +20.8% for MGY, so the Street currently favors EXE. 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, EXE or MGY?
EXE is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EXE 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, EXE or MGY?
MGY 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, EXE or MGY?
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, EXE or MGY?
EXE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. EXE carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is EXE more profitable than MGY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 63.1% vs 57.6%; operating margin 26% vs 38%; ttm roe 14.7% vs 21.1%. EXE leads on one measure and MGY 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 EXE's lead over MGY getting stronger or weaker?
EXE lead: Reversed — MGY led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EXE now leads by 1. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-01, when EXE moved ahead of MGY.
What would change the EXE vs MGY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MGY closes the Value gap — currently 10 points behind, the largest single contributor to EXE's edge; MGY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; EXE 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 EXE and MGY?
EXE: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. MGY: 2 bullish / 1 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 EXE is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On MGY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare EXE and MGY 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.