GOOD vs OBDC Stock Comparison
Compare GOOD and OBDC across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between GOOD and OBDC?
OBDC leads the current stock comparison as Blue Owl Capital Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Gladstone Commercial Corporation vs Blue Owl Capital Corporation
OBDC leads
OBDC leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 11 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support OBDC, and its lead is narrowing.
Gladstone Commercial Corporation
Blue Owl Capital Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors OBDC over GOOD, 52 versus 51 as of Sep 6, 2026. OBDC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while GOOD holds the stronger momentum profile. OBDC also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor OBDC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. OBDC lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Gladstone Commercial Corporation and Blue Owl Capital 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 GOOD and OBDC 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.
- Quality30%19 vs 51OBDC +32
- Momentum25%67 vs 51GOOD +16
- Value30%66 vs 54GOOD +12
- Risk Resilience15%60 vs 52GOOD +8
2 of 6 evidence groups favor OBDC. OBDC’s edge is concentrated in quality; GOOD keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
OBDC's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — GOOD and OBDC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
OBDC (Blue Owl Capital Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
GOOD (Gladstone Commercial Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, value, risk resilience.
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
OBDCOBDC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
GOODGOOD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
GOODGOOD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
GOODGOOD on the Momentum factor, by 16 points.
Lower downside
GOODGOOD on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
OBDCOBDC 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 | GOOD | OBDC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -0.8% | +14% | OBDC has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 2 | 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 OBDC. 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 | 51 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | OBDCon balance | revenue growth 5% vs 28.7%; EPS growth 37.5% vs 3.6%; TTM ROE 11.7% vs 4%; gross margin 15.9% vs 67.6%; operating margin 39.1% vs 48.7% — OBDC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | GOOD | Value 66 vs 54 |
| Technicals | GOOD | Price vs 50-day 2.3% vs 2.3%; vs 200-day 8.6% vs -1.7% |
| Risk Resilience | GOOD | Risk Resilience 60 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | OBDC | Target upside -0.8% vs 14% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of GOOD and OBDC 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 leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 OBDC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5OBDC lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- OBDC +1
- 51 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- OBDC +4
- 47 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- OBDC +11
- 46 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 46 vs 46
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Sep 4 when OBDC moved ahead of GOOD.
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.10%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.8%)
0 bullish / 2 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.07%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
GOOD 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 +0.69%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.18%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1GOOD closes the Quality gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to OBDC's edge.
- 2GOOD generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3OBDC starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate OBDC's advantage entirely.
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
OBDC leads on balance| Metric | GOOD | OBDC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5% | 28.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 37.5% | 3.6% |
| Gross margin | 15.9% | 67.6% |
| Operating margin | 39.1% | 48.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.7% | 4% |
| Debt to equity | 5.46 | 0.87 |
Performance
GOOD leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | GOOD | OBDC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.8% | 0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.2% | -2.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2.8% | 3.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.1% | -0.6% |
| Year to date | 22.9% | -8.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 0.3% | -19.8% |
Technicals
GOOD has the stronger structure| Metric | GOOD | OBDC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 56.1 | 44.9 |
| ADX (14) | 12.6 | 18.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.3% | 2.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8.6% | -1.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 17.7% | 16.8% |
Risk
GOOD is the more resilient| Metric | GOOD | OBDC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.24 | 0.8 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.1 | -0.99 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.16 | -1.54 |
| Max drawdown | -21.7% | -25.6% |
| Current drawdown | -1.1% | -20.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.8% | 24.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, GOOD or OBDC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, OBDC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 52 against GOOD's 51. The edge comes from quality. GOOD 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 GOOD or OBDC the better buy right now?
OBDC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 OBDC over GOOD?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. OBDC leads Quality by 32 points; GOOD leads Momentum by 16 points; GOOD leads Value by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, GOOD or OBDC?
Analyst price targets imply -0.8% upside for GOOD and +14% for OBDC, so the Street currently favors OBDC. 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, GOOD or OBDC?
GOOD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GOOD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 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, GOOD or OBDC?
GOOD 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, GOOD or OBDC?
GOOD on the Momentum factor, by 16 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, GOOD or OBDC?
GOOD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GOOD on Risk Resilience, by 8 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is GOOD more profitable than OBDC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 15.9% vs 67.6%; operating margin 39.1% vs 48.7%; ttm roe 11.7% vs 4%. GOOD leads on one measure and OBDC 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 OBDC's lead over GOOD getting stronger or weaker?
OBDC lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-04, when OBDC moved ahead of GOOD.
What would change the GOOD vs OBDC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: GOOD closes the Quality gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to OBDC's edge; GOOD generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; OBDC starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate OBDC's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about GOOD and OBDC?
GOOD: 4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. OBDC: 0 bullish / 2 bearish. 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 GOOD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On OBDC it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare GOOD and OBDC with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.