FTV vs HLIO Stock Comparison
FTV currently leads HLIO in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 65 vs 54. The clearest difference is momentum, while HLIO has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between FTV and HLIO?
FTV leads the current stock comparison as Fortive Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Fortive Corporation vs Helios Technologies, Inc.
FTV leads
FTV leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 5 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors HLIO on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support FTV, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Fortive Corporation
Helios Technologies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors FTV over HLIO, 65 versus 54 as of Oct 21, 2026. FTV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while HLIO holds the stronger risk resilience profile. FTV also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors HLIO. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FTV today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. FTV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Fortive Corporation and Helios Technologies, 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 FTV and HLIO 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.
- Momentum72 vs 42FTV +30
- Value66 vs 56FTV +10
- Quality58 vs 52FTV +6
- Risk Resilience67 vs 72HLIO +5
4 of 6 evidence groups favor FTV. FTV’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; HLIO 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.
Largest factor move: Momentum +20
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
FTV's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FTV and HLIO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
FTV (Fortive Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
HLIO (Helios Technologies, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
FTVFTV on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
FTVFTV on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
FTVFTV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
FTVFTV on the Momentum factor, by 30 points.
Lower downside
HLIOHLIO on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
HLIOHLIO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors FTV, analyst targets favor HLIO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | FTV | HLIO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +8.5% | +31.5% | HLIO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +14.2% | +10.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 3 | 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 | FTV | HLIO |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 2.66% | 0.00% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.211 | $0.360 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.241 | $0.360 |
| Years increased | 2 | 0 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #349 |
FTV grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 2.66% a year against HLIO's 0.00%. HLIO never reduced its regular dividend in the window; FTV did in 1 year.
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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FTV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | FTV | 65 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | FTV | revenue growth 2.6% vs 1.5%; EPS growth 18.2% vs 10%; TTM ROE 8.5% vs 7.6%; gross margin 63.2% vs 32.7%; operating margin 18.2% vs 10% |
| Valuation | FTV | Value 66 vs 56 |
| Technicals | FTV | Price vs 50-day 1.9% vs -2.9%; vs 200-day -0.1% vs -6.9% |
| Risk Resilience | HLIO | Risk Resilience 67 vs 72 |
| Analyst expectations | HLIO | Target upside 8.5% vs 31.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FTV and HLIO 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 moderate at 11 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 FTV.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20FTV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- FTV +11
- 65 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- FTV +10
- 63 vs 53
- 30 sessions ago
- FTV +5
- 57 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- HLIO +2
- 55 vs 57
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 18 when FTV moved ahead of HLIO.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only HLIO
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Death Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
FTV 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.48%, AIQ +5 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.12%, 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.
- 1HLIO closes the Momentum gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to FTV's edge.
- 2HLIO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3FTV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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
FTV leads on balance| Metric | FTV | HLIO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.6% | 1.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 18.2% | 10% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 32.7% |
| Operating margin | 18.2% | 10% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.5% | 7.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 0.02 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | FTV | HLIO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.5% | -2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4.3% | -0.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.1% | -15.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -4.4% | -1.6% |
| Year to date | 5.7% | 27.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 19.9% | 28% |
Technicals
FTV has the stronger structure| Metric | FTV | HLIO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 69.8 | 50.4 |
| ADX (14) | 16.2 | 25.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.9% | -2.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.1% | -6.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.8% | 25.6% |
Risk
HLIO is the more resilient| Metric | FTV | HLIO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.6 | 1.47 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.67 | 0.74 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.99 | 1.39 |
| Max drawdown | -14.9% | -28.4% |
| Current drawdown | -8.9% | -26.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.8% | 38.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -3.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FTV or HLIO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, FTV is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 65 against HLIO's 54. The edge comes from momentum and value. HLIO 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 FTV or HLIO the better buy right now?
FTV carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 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 FTV over HLIO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. FTV leads Momentum by 30 points; FTV leads Value by 10 points; FTV leads Quality by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FTV or HLIO?
Analyst price targets imply +8.5% upside for FTV and +31.5% for HLIO, so the Street currently favors HLIO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors FTV. 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, FTV or HLIO?
FTV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FTV 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, FTV or HLIO?
FTV 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, FTV or HLIO?
FTV on the Momentum factor, by 30 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, FTV or HLIO?
HLIO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HLIO on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 FTV more profitable than HLIO?
FTV leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 63.2% vs 32.7%; operating margin 18.2% vs 10%; ttm roe 8.5% vs 7.6%.
Is FTV's lead over HLIO getting stronger or weaker?
FTV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 11 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-18, when FTV moved ahead of HLIO.
What would change the FTV vs HLIO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HLIO closes the Momentum gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to FTV's edge; HLIO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; FTV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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 FTV and HLIO?
FTV: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. HLIO: 1 bullish / 2 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 FTV is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On HLIO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare FTV and HLIO 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.