FLO vs HSY Stock Comparison
Compare FLO and HSY across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between FLO and HSY?
FLO leads the current stock comparison as Flowers Foods, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Flowers Foods, Inc. vs The Hershey Company
FLO leads
FLO leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from HSY. Wall Street currently favors HSY on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support FLO, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Flowers Foods, Inc.
The Hershey Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors FLO over HSY, 43 versus 40 as of Sep 11, 2026. FLO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while HSY holds the stronger quality profile. FLO also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors HSY. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FLO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. FLO lead: Reversed — HSY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FLO now leads by 3.
Compare Flowers Foods, Inc. and The Hershey Company 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 FLO and HSY 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.
- Value73 vs 31FLO +42
- Quality33 vs 61HSY +28
- Risk Resilience30 vs 45HSY +15
- Momentum25 vs 21FLO +4
1 of 6 evidence groups favor FLO. FLO’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; HSY 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.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
FLO's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FLO and HSY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
FLO (Flowers Foods, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
HSY (The Hershey Company): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
FLOFLO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HSYHSY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
FLOFLO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 42 points.
Momentum
FLOFLO on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
HSYHSY on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
HSYHSY on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors FLO, analyst targets favor HSY. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | FLO | HSY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +14.9% | +21% | HSY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +28.6% | +33.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 13 | 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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FLO. 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 | 43 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | HSYon balance | revenue growth -24.1% vs -10.2%; EPS growth -5% vs 3.2%; TTM ROE 4.1% vs 32.2%; gross margin 47.9% vs 38.1%; operating margin 5.5% vs 17.6% — HSY takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | FLO | Value 73 vs 31 |
| Technicals | HSY | Price vs 50-day -18.8% vs -2.9%; vs 200-day -31.2% vs -9.3% |
| Risk Resilience | HSY | Risk Resilience 30 vs 45 |
| Analyst expectations | HSY | Target upside 14.9% vs 21% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FLO and HSY 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 1 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 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 FLO.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10FLO lead: Reversed — HSY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FLO now leads by 3.
- Today
- FLO +3
- 43 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- FLO +1
- 42 vs 41
- 30 sessions ago
- HSY +3
- 49 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- FLO +11
- 53 vs 42
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 28 when FLO moved ahead of HSY.
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.
1 bullish / 5 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (18.34%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.70%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
FLO 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 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.33%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.59%, 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.
- 1HSY closes the Value gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to FLO's edge.
- 2HSY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3FLO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
HSY leads on balance| Metric | FLO | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -24.1% | -10.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -5% | 3.2% |
| Gross margin | 47.9% | 38.1% |
| Operating margin | 5.5% | 17.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 4.1% | 32.2% |
| Debt to equity | 1.52 | 1.23 |
Performance
HSY leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | FLO | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -8.5% | -1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -14.8% | -5.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -21.4% | -1.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -29.1% | -20% |
| Year to date | -41.8% | -4.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -58.5% | -7% |
Technicals
HSY has the stronger structure| Metric | FLO | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 26.5 | 25.3 |
| ADX (14) | 37.3 | 20.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -18.8% | -2.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -31.2% | -9.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 42% | 21.8% |
Risk
HSY is the more resilient| Metric | FLO | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.06 | -0.13 |
| Sharpe ratio | -2.21 | -0.27 |
| Sortino ratio | -3.36 | -0.46 |
| Max drawdown | -58.7% | -27.9% |
| Current drawdown | -58.7% | -26.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 38.5% | 27.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | -2.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FLO or HSY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, FLO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 43 against HSY's 40. The edge comes from value and momentum. HSY 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 FLO or HSY the better buy right now?
FLO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 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 FLO over HSY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. FLO leads Value by 42 points; HSY leads Quality by 28 points; HSY leads Risk Resilience by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FLO or HSY?
Analyst price targets imply +14.9% upside for FLO and +21% for HSY, so the Street currently favors HSY. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors FLO. 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, FLO or HSY?
FLO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FLO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 42 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, FLO or HSY?
HSY 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, FLO or HSY?
FLO 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, FLO or HSY?
HSY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HSY on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 FLO more profitable than HSY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 47.9% vs 38.1%; operating margin 5.5% vs 17.6%; ttm roe 4.1% vs 32.2%. FLO leads on one measure and HSY 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 FLO's lead over HSY getting stronger or weaker?
FLO lead: Reversed — HSY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FLO now leads by 3. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-28, when FLO moved ahead of HSY.
What would change the FLO vs HSY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HSY closes the Value gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to FLO's edge; HSY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; FLO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 FLO and HSY?
FLO: 1 bullish / 5 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. HSY: 1 bullish / 3 bearish, 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 FLO is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On HSY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare FLO and HSY 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.