GME vs LOW Stock Comparison
LOW currently leads GME in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 53 vs 52. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while GME has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between GME and LOW?
LOW leads the current stock comparison as Lowe's Companies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
GameStop Corp. vs Lowe's Companies, Inc.
LOW leads
LOW leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from GME.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support LOW, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
GameStop Corp.
Lowe's Companies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LOW over GME, 53 versus 52 as of Oct 21, 2026. LOW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while GME holds the stronger momentum profile. LOW also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LOW today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. LOW lead: Reversed — GME led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LOW now leads by 1.
Compare GameStop Corp. and Lowe's Companies, 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 GME and LOW 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 Resilience42 vs 50LOW +8
- Value46 vs 53LOW +7
- Momentum72 vs 65GME +7
- Quality48 vs 45Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor LOW. LOW’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; GME keeps a meaningful momentum 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 -3
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
The lead changed hands: LOW moved ahead of GME in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — GME and LOW both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LOW (Lowe's Companies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
GME (GameStop Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 46.1% against 28.3%.
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
LOWLOW on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
GMEGME on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
LOWLOW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 points.
Momentum
GMEGME on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
LOWLOW on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
LOWLOW 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 | GME | LOW | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -56.3% | +25.7% | LOW has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +36.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | — | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LOW. 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 | 52 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | GMEon balance | revenue growth -24.4% vs 12.5%; EPS growth 210.7% vs 47.6%; TTM ROE 14% vs -71.8%; gross margin 34.4% vs 33.1%; operating margin 10.6% vs 11.4% — GME takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LOW | Value 46 vs 53 |
| Technicals | GME | Price vs 50-day 19.8% vs -1.1%; vs 200-day 17.4% vs -13% |
| Risk Resilience | LOW | Risk Resilience 42 vs 50 |
| Analyst expectations | LOW | Target upside -56.3% vs 25.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of GME and LOW 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 3 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 LOW.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20LOW lead: Reversed — GME led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LOW now leads by 1.
- Today
- LOW +1
- 52 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- GME +5
- 55 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- GME +12
- 55 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- LOW +8
- 42 vs 50
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 20 when LOW moved ahead of GME.
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 / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only GME
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.15%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only LOW
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Death Cross Active.
LOW 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 down over the latest session (price -0.68%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.99%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1GME closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to LOW's edge.
- 2GME's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3LOW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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
GME leads on balance| Metric | GME | LOW |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -24.4% | 12.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 210.7% | 47.6% |
| Gross margin | 34.4% | 33.1% |
| Operating margin | 10.6% | 11.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 14% | -71.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.74 | -5.65 |
Performance
GME leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | GME | LOW |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.8% | 5.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 10.2% | 1.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 22.5% | -2.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 8.2% | -21% |
| Year to date | 31.8% | -17.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 15.3% | -18.3% |
Technicals
GME has the stronger structure| Metric | GME | LOW |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.1 | 68.5 |
| ADX (14) | 56.2 | 23.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 19.8% | -1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 17.4% | -13% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 46.1% | 28.3% |
Risk
LOW is the more resilient| Metric | GME | LOW |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.55 | 0.63 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.45 | -0.76 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.64 | -1.36 |
| Max drawdown | -32.6% | -37.5% |
| Current drawdown | -5.5% | -30.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 38.6% | 27.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, GME or LOW?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LOW is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 53 against GME's 52. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. GME is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 GME or LOW the better buy right now?
LOW carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 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 LOW over GME?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LOW leads Risk Resilience by 8 points; LOW leads Value by 7 points; GME leads Momentum by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, GME or LOW?
Analyst price targets imply -56.3% upside for GME and +25.7% for LOW, so the Street currently favors LOW. 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, GME or LOW?
LOW is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LOW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 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, GME or LOW?
GME 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, GME or LOW?
GME on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, GME or LOW?
LOW is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LOW 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 GME more profitable than LOW?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 34.4% vs 33.1%; operating margin 10.6% vs 11.4%; ttm roe 14% vs -71.8%. GME leads on two measures and LOW 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 LOW's lead over GME getting stronger or weaker?
LOW lead: Reversed — GME led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LOW now leads by 1. 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 2026-10-20, when LOW moved ahead of GME.
What would change the GME vs LOW verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: GME closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to LOW's edge; GME's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; LOW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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 GME and LOW?
GME: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. LOW: 2 bullish / 2 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 GME is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On LOW it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare GME and LOW 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.