HEI vs HWM Stock Comparison
Compare HEI and HWM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HEI and HWM?
HWM leads the current stock comparison as Howmet Aerospace Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
HEICO Corporation vs Howmet Aerospace Inc.
HWM leads
HWM leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support HWM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
HEICO Corporation
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HWM over HEI, 40 versus 39 as of Sep 11, 2026. HWM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while HEI holds the stronger risk resilience profile. HWM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HWM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. HWM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare HEICO Corporation and Howmet Aerospace 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 HEI and HWM 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 Resilience74 vs 48HEI +26
- Quality59 vs 68HWM +9
- Momentum12 vs 18HWM +6
- Value25 vs 25Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor HWM. HWM’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; HEI 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: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
HWM's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HEI and HWM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HWM (Howmet Aerospace Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
HEI (HEICO Corporation): 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
HWMHWM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
HWMHWM on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
HEIHEI on Risk Resilience, by 26 points.
Analyst upside
HWMHWM 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 | HEI | HWM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +26.4% | +42.3% | HWM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +35.3% | +24.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 9 | 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 HWM. 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 | 39 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | HWMon balance | revenue growth 2.7% vs 10.1%; TTM ROE 18.3% vs 34.4%; gross margin 40.4% vs 34.4%; operating margin 24% vs 28.3% — HWM takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 25 vs 25 |
| Technicals | HEI | Price vs 50-day -9.7% vs -15.9%; vs 200-day -3.2% vs -5.7% |
| Risk Resilience | HEI | Risk Resilience 74 vs 48 |
| Analyst expectations | HWM | Target upside 26.4% vs 42.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HEI and HWM 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 HWM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10HWM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- HWM +1
- 39 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 41 vs 41
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 53 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- HEI +4
- 56 vs 52
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 26 when HWM moved ahead of HEI.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.41%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.00%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
HWM 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 +1.12%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.75%, 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.
- 1HEI closes the Quality gap — currently 9 points behind, the largest single contributor to HWM's edge.
- 2HEI's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3HWM'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
HWM leads on balance| Metric | HEI | HWM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.7% | 10.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0.6% | -8.3% |
| Gross margin | 40.4% | 34.4% |
| Operating margin | 24% | 28.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 18.3% | 34.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.51 | 0.79 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | HEI | HWM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.2% | -8.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -16.2% | -16.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2.6% | -5.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 1.8% | -8.5% |
| Year to date | -3.4% | 11.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -1.5% | 28.1% |
Technicals
HEI has the stronger structure| Metric | HEI | HWM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 14 | 25.9 |
| ADX (14) | 34.2 | 28.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.7% | -15.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.2% | -5.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 19.7% | 45% |
Risk
HEI is the more resilient| Metric | HEI | HWM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.17 | 1.12 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0 | 0.77 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.01 | 1.14 |
| Max drawdown | -27.1% | -22.1% |
| Current drawdown | -16.6% | -22.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 31.9% | 34.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HEI or HWM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HWM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 40 against HEI's 39. The edge comes from quality and momentum. HEI 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 HEI or HWM the better buy right now?
HWM 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 HWM over HEI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HEI leads Risk Resilience by 26 points; HWM leads Quality by 9 points; HWM leads Momentum by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HEI or HWM?
Analyst price targets imply +26.4% upside for HEI and +42.3% for HWM, so the Street currently favors HWM. 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, HEI or HWM?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, HEI or HWM?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, HEI or HWM?
HWM on the Momentum factor, by 6 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, HEI or HWM?
HEI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HEI on Risk Resilience, by 26 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 HEI more profitable than HWM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 40.4% vs 34.4%; operating margin 24% vs 28.3%; ttm roe 18.3% vs 34.4%. HEI leads on one measure and HWM 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 HWM's lead over HEI getting stronger or weaker?
HWM 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-26, when HWM moved ahead of HEI.
What would change the HEI vs HWM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HEI closes the Quality gap — currently 9 points behind, the largest single contributor to HWM's edge; HEI's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; HWM'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 HEI and HWM?
HEI: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. HWM: 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 HEI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On HWM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare HEI and HWM 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.