HES vs MGY Stock Comparison
Compare HES and MGY across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HES and MGY?
MGY leads the current stock comparison as Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Hess Corporation vs Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation
MGY leads
MGY leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Value, but the lead has narrowed from 17 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 5 evidence groups support MGY, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Hess Corporation
Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MGY over HES, 59 versus 54 as of Sep 11, 2026. MGY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value. 4 of 5 covered evidence groups favor MGY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. MGY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Hess Corporation and Magnolia Oil & Gas 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 HES and MGY 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.
- Value32 vs 46MGY +14
- Risk Resilience57 vs 55Even
- Quality75 vs 74Even
4 of 5 evidence groups favor MGY. MGY’s edge is concentrated in value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No new signals fired.
MGY's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HES and MGY both carry a full feed there.
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
MGYMGY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MGYMGY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MGYMGY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
MGYMGY 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 | HES | MGY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +4% | +20.8% | MGY has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +26.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 8 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 5 covered evidence groups favor MGY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MGY | 54 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | MGYon balance | revenue growth 26.1% vs 33.6%; EPS growth 2.8% vs 79.6%; TTM ROE 27.4% vs 21.1%; gross margin 78.9% vs 57.6%; operating margin 37% vs 38% — MGY takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | MGY | Value 32 vs 46 |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 57 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | MGY | Target upside 4% vs 20.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HES and MGY 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 4 of 5 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 MGY.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MGY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MGY +5
- 54 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- MGY +6
- 54 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- MGY +17
- 45 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- MGY +7
- 45 vs 52
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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.
No active signals
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.75%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
MGY 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.18%, 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.
- 1HES closes the Value gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to MGY's edge.
- 2HES generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3MGY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 12 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate MGY'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
MGY leads on balance| Metric | HES | MGY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 26.1% | 33.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 2.8% | 79.6% |
| Gross margin | 78.9% | 57.6% |
| Operating margin | 37% | 38% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 27.4% | 21.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.84 | 0.18 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | HES | MGY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | — | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | — | 5.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | — | -0.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | — | -4.7% |
| Year to date | — | 26.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | — | 18.2% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | HES | MGY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | — | 45.5 |
| ADX (14) | — | 9.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | — | 6.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | — | 4.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | — | 30.1% |
Risk
Split| Metric | HES | MGY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | — | -0.43 |
| Sharpe ratio | — | 0.57 |
| Sortino ratio | — | 0.83 |
| Max drawdown | — | -27.7% |
| Current drawdown | — | -14.4% |
| Annualized volatility | — | 32.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | — | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HES or MGY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MGY is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 59 against HES's 54. The edge comes from value. 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 HES or MGY the better buy right now?
MGY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MGY over HES?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MGY leads Value by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HES or MGY?
Analyst price targets imply +4% upside for HES and +20.8% for MGY, so the Street currently favors MGY. 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, HES or MGY?
MGY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MGY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 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, HES or MGY?
MGY 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, HES or MGY?
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, HES or MGY?
The two are close on downside measures. Downside measures are level or not covered. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is HES more profitable than MGY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 78.9% vs 57.6%; operating margin 37% vs 38%; ttm roe 27.4% vs 21.1%. HES leads on two measures and MGY on one measure, 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 MGY's lead over HES getting stronger or weaker?
MGY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 5 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the HES vs MGY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HES closes the Value gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to MGY's edge; HES generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; MGY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 12 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate MGY's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about HES and MGY?
HES: No active signals. MGY: 2 bullish / 1 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. On MGY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare HES and MGY 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.