HAYW vs HOLX Stock Comparison
Compare HAYW and HOLX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HAYW and HOLX?
HAYW leads the current stock comparison as Hayward Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Hayward Holdings, Inc. vs Hologic, Inc.
HAYW leads
HAYW leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Value.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support HAYW, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Hayward Holdings, Inc.
Hologic, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HAYW over HOLX, 55 versus 54 as of Sep 11, 2026. HAYW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while HOLX holds the stronger risk resilience profile. HAYW also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HAYW today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. HAYW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Hayward Holdings, Inc. and Hologic, Inc. 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 HAYW and HOLX 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.
- Value64 vs 37HAYW +27
- Risk Resilience75 vs 81HOLX +6
- Quality60 vs 58Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor HAYW. HAYW’s edge is concentrated in value; HOLX keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
HAYW's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HAYW and HOLX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HAYW (Hayward Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
HOLX (Hologic, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, technicals.
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
HAYWHAYW on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HAYWHAYW on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
HAYWHAYW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
HOLXHOLX on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
HAYWHAYW 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 | HAYW | HOLX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +37.3% | +3.9% | HAYW has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 1 | 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 HAYW. 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 | 55 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | Even | EPS growth 90.9% vs -4.8%; TTM ROE 10.2% vs 11%; gross margin 44.6% vs 52.8%; operating margin 21.2% vs 17.5% |
| Valuation | HAYW | Value 64 vs 37 |
| Technicals | HOLX | Price vs 50-day -12.3% vs 1%; vs 200-day -14.9% vs 6.7% |
| Risk Resilience | HOLX | Risk Resilience 75 vs 81 |
| Analyst expectations | HAYW | Target upside 37.3% vs 3.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HAYW and HOLX 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 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 HAYW.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10HAYW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- HAYW +1
- 55 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- HAYW +2
- 56 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- HAYW +3
- 57 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- HAYW +12
- 66 vs 54
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 24 when HOLX moved ahead of HAYW.
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.
2 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.49%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
No active signals
HAYW 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 +1.79%, 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.
- 1HOLX closes the Value gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to HAYW's edge.
- 2HOLX generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3HAYW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 5 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
Split| Metric | HAYW | HOLX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 24.7% | -0.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 90.9% | -4.8% |
| Gross margin | 44.6% | 52.8% |
| Operating margin | 21.2% | 17.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.2% | 11% |
| Debt to equity | 0.01 | 0.48 |
Performance
HOLX leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | HAYW | HOLX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.5% | 0.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -15.8% | 0.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.7% | 1.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -11.4% | 13.4% |
| Year to date | -14.3% | 2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -19.3% | 23.8% |
Technicals
HOLX has the stronger structure| Metric | HAYW | HOLX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 14.1 | 77.2 |
| ADX (14) | 25.6 | 18.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -12.3% | 1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -14.9% | 6.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.6% | 3% |
Risk
HOLX is the more resilient| Metric | HAYW | HOLX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.1 | 0.07 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.55 | 1.05 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.9 | 1.56 |
| Max drawdown | -25.6% | -8.2% |
| Current drawdown | -25.6% | 0% |
| Annualized volatility | 33% | 16% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -1.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HAYW or HOLX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HAYW is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 55 against HOLX's 54. The edge comes from value. HOLX 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 HAYW or HOLX the better buy right now?
HAYW carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 HAYW over HOLX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HAYW leads Value by 27 points; HOLX leads Risk Resilience by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HAYW or HOLX?
Analyst price targets imply +37.3% upside for HAYW and +3.9% for HOLX, so the Street currently favors HAYW. 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, HAYW or HOLX?
HAYW is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. HAYW 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, HAYW or HOLX?
HAYW 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, HAYW or HOLX?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, HAYW or HOLX?
HOLX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HOLX on Risk Resilience, by 6 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 HAYW more profitable than HOLX?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 44.6% vs 52.8%; operating margin 21.2% vs 17.5%; ttm roe 10.2% vs 11%. HAYW leads on one measure and HOLX 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 HAYW's lead over HOLX getting stronger or weaker?
HAYW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-24, when HOLX moved ahead of HAYW.
What would change the HAYW vs HOLX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HOLX closes the Value gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to HAYW's edge; HOLX generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; HAYW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 5 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 HAYW and HOLX?
HAYW: 2 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. HOLX: No active signals. 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 HAYW is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare HAYW and HOLX 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.