HAL vs RIG Stock Comparison
RIG currently leads HAL in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 54 vs 52. The clearest difference is momentum, while HAL has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between HAL and RIG?
RIG leads the current stock comparison as Transocean Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Halliburton Company vs Transocean Ltd.
RIG leads
RIG leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from HAL. Wall Street currently favors HAL on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support RIG, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Halliburton Company
Transocean Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors RIG over HAL, 54 versus 52 as of Oct 21, 2026. RIG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while HAL holds the stronger value profile. RIG also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors HAL. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RIG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. RIG lead: Reversed — HAL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RIG now leads by 2.
Compare Halliburton Company and Transocean Ltd. 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 HAL and RIG 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.
- Momentum57 vs 79RIG +22
- Value53 vs 37HAL +16
- Risk Resilience65 vs 50HAL +15
- Quality41 vs 51RIG +10
2 of 6 evidence groups favor RIG. RIG’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; HAL keeps a meaningful value 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 +2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
RIG's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HAL and RIG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
RIG (Transocean Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
HAL (Halliburton Company): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation.
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
RIGRIG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
RIGRIG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
HALHAL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 points.
Momentum
RIGRIG on the Momentum factor, by 22 points.
Lower downside
HALHAL on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
HALHAL on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors RIG, analyst targets favor HAL. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | HAL | RIG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +28% | +15.9% | HAL has more room |
| Target dispersion | +41.4% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 2 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RIG. 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 54 |
| Fundamentals | RIGon balance | revenue growth 5.8% vs -10.6%; EPS growth 16.4% vs 134.4%; TTM ROE 15.1% vs -20.2%; gross margin 15.1% vs 74.3%; operating margin 11.4% vs 22.2% — RIG takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | HAL | Value 53 vs 37 |
| Technicals | RIG | Price vs 50-day -0.4% vs 6.9%; vs 200-day -5.9% vs 0.8% |
| Risk Resilience | HAL | Risk Resilience 65 vs 50 |
| Analyst expectations | HAL | Target upside 28% vs 15.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HAL and RIG 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 2 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 lead has been steady session to session. (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 RIG.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20RIG lead: Reversed — HAL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RIG now leads by 2.
- Today
- RIG +2
- 52 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- HAL +3
- 49 vs 46
- 30 sessions ago
- HAL +4
- 44 vs 40
- 90 sessions ago
- HAL +4
- 57 vs 53
The lead changed hands 12 times in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when RIG moved ahead of HAL.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only HAL
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only RIG
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.84%)
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
RIG 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.19%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +3.78%, 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.
- 1HAL closes the Momentum gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to RIG's edge.
- 2HAL's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3RIG'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
RIG leads on balance| Metric | HAL | RIG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.8% | -10.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 16.4% | 134.4% |
| Gross margin | 15.1% | 74.3% |
| Operating margin | 11.4% | 22.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 15.1% | -20.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.74 | 0.61 |
Performance
RIG leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | HAL | RIG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.4% | 3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.3% | 6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.7% | 9.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -12% | -3.8% |
| Year to date | 18.9% | 40.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 53.9% | 80.2% |
Technicals
RIG has the stronger structure| Metric | HAL | RIG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 67.9 | 70.1 |
| ADX (14) | 22.2 | 18.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.4% | 6.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -5.9% | 0.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 24% | 35.9% |
Risk
HAL is the more resilient| Metric | HAL | RIG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.1 | 0.43 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.25 | 1.32 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.31 | 2.16 |
| Max drawdown | -27.4% | -35.8% |
| Current drawdown | -21.9% | -23.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.7% | 51% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -4.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HAL or RIG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, RIG is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 54 against HAL's 52. The edge comes from momentum and quality. HAL 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 HAL or RIG the better buy right now?
RIG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor RIG over HAL?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. RIG leads Momentum by 22 points; HAL leads Value by 16 points; HAL leads Risk Resilience by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HAL or RIG?
Analyst price targets imply +28% upside for HAL and +15.9% for RIG, so the Street currently favors HAL. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors RIG. 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, HAL or RIG?
HAL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. HAL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 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, HAL or RIG?
RIG 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, HAL or RIG?
RIG on the Momentum factor, by 22 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, HAL or RIG?
HAL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HAL 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 HAL more profitable than RIG?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 15.1% vs 74.3%; operating margin 11.4% vs 22.2%; ttm roe 15.1% vs -20.2%. HAL leads on one measure and RIG 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 RIG's lead over HAL getting stronger or weaker?
RIG lead: Reversed — HAL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RIG now leads by 2. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 12 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-19, when RIG moved ahead of HAL.
What would change the HAL vs RIG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HAL closes the Momentum gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to RIG's edge; HAL's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; RIG'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 HAL and RIG?
HAL: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. RIG: 2 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 HAL is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On RIG it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare HAL and RIG 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.