GPC vs HSY Stock Comparison
HSY currently leads GPC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 45 vs 42. The clearest difference is quality, while GPC has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between GPC and HSY?
HSY leads the current stock comparison as The Hershey Company, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Genuine Parts Company vs The Hershey Company
HSY leads
HSY leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from GPC.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support HSY, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Genuine Parts Company
The Hershey Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HSY over GPC, 45 versus 42 as of Oct 31, 2026. HSY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while GPC holds the stronger value profile. HSY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HSY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. HSY lead: Reversed — GPC led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HSY now leads by 3.
Compare Genuine Parts Company and The Hershey Company 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 GPC 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.
- Quality25 vs 61HSY +36
- Value58 vs 31GPC +27
- Risk Resilience52 vs 43GPC +9
- Momentum36 vs 44HSY +8
2 of 6 evidence groups favor HSY. HSY’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; GPC keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
HSY's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — GPC and HSY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HSY (The Hershey Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
GPC (Genuine Parts Company): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation.
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
HSYHSY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
GPCGPC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
GPCGPC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 points.
Momentum
HSYHSY on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
GPCGPC on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
HSYHSY 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 | GPC | HSY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +17.7% | +20.9% | HSY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.7% | +38.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | GPC | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 5.45% | 11.68% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $3.160 | $3.154 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $4.120 | $5.480 |
| Years increased | 5 | 4 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #235 | #66 |
HSY grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 11.68% a year against GPC's 5.45%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HSY. 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 | 42 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | HSY | EPS growth -1.2% vs 3.2%; gross margin 36.4% vs 38.1%; operating margin 4% vs 17.6% |
| Valuation | GPC | Value 58 vs 31 |
| Technicals | GPC | Price vs 50-day -7.4% vs -3%; vs 200-day 1.1% vs -13.5% |
| Risk Resilience | GPC | Risk Resilience 52 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | HSY | Target upside 17.7% vs 20.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of GPC 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 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 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 HSY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28HSY lead: Reversed — GPC led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HSY now leads by 3.
- Today
- HSY +3
- 42 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- HSY +6
- 42 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- GPC +1
- 42 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- GPC +4
- 52 vs 48
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when HSY moved ahead of GPC.
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, conflicted
Only GPC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.76%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only HSY
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (10.85%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
HSY 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 -1.22%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +3.33%, 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.
- 1GPC closes the Quality gap — currently 36 points behind, the largest single contributor to HSY's edge.
- 2GPC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3HSY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
HSY leads on balance| Metric | GPC | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.2% | -10.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -1.2% | 3.2% |
| Gross margin | 36.4% | 38.1% |
| Operating margin | 4% | 17.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 0.7% | 32.2% |
| Debt to equity | 1.47 | 1.23 |
Performance
GPC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | GPC | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.7% | -2.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.5% | 3.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2.8% | -7.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 17.5% | -13.4% |
| Year to date | -1.3% | -10% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -7.3% | -8.7% |
Technicals
GPC has the stronger structure| Metric | GPC | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38.7 | 51.6 |
| ADX (14) | 21.2 | 21.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.4% | -3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.1% | -13.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.1% | 28.4% |
Risk
GPC is the more resilient| Metric | GPC | HSY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.49 | -0.21 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.19 | -0.35 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.26 | -0.59 |
| Max drawdown | -38% | -33.3% |
| Current drawdown | -18.7% | -30.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 33.8% | 27.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -2.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, GPC or HSY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HSY is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 45 against GPC's 42. The edge comes from quality and momentum. GPC is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 GPC or HSY the better buy right now?
HSY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor HSY over GPC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HSY leads Quality by 36 points; GPC leads Value by 27 points; GPC leads Risk Resilience by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, GPC or HSY?
Analyst price targets imply +17.7% upside for GPC and +20.9% for HSY, so the Street currently favors HSY. 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, GPC or HSY?
GPC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GPC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 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, GPC or HSY?
GPC 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, GPC or HSY?
HSY on the Momentum factor, by 8 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, GPC or HSY?
GPC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GPC on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 GPC more profitable than HSY?
HSY leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 36.4% vs 38.1%; operating margin 4% vs 17.6%; ttm roe 0.7% vs 32.2%.
Is HSY's lead over GPC getting stronger or weaker?
HSY lead: Reversed — GPC led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HSY now leads by 3. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-19, when HSY moved ahead of GPC.
What would change the GPC vs HSY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: GPC closes the Quality gap — currently 36 points behind, the largest single contributor to HSY's edge; GPC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; HSY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 GPC and HSY?
GPC: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. HSY: 1 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 GPC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On HSY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare GPC 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.