HII vs LHX Stock Comparison
Compare HII and LHX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HII and LHX?
LHX leads the current stock comparison as L3Harris Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. vs L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
LHX leads
LHX leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support LHX, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.
L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LHX over HII, 45 versus 44 as of Sep 11, 2026. LHX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while HII holds the stronger value profile. LHX also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LHX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. LHX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. and L3Harris Technologies, 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 HII and LHX 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.
- Value68 vs 58HII +10
- Risk Resilience50 vs 60LHX +10
- Momentum17 vs 21LHX +4
- Quality40 vs 43Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor LHX. LHX’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; HII keeps a meaningful value edge.
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 -1
No new signals fired.
LHX's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HII and LHX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LHX (L3Harris Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
HII (Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, fundamentals, 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
LHXLHX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HIIHII on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
HIIHII on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
LHXLHX on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
LHXLHX on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
LHXLHX 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 | HII | LHX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +19.5% | +28.3% | LHX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +4.8% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 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 LHX. 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 | 44 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | HIIon balance | revenue growth 10.3% vs 2.4%; EPS growth 39.1% vs 15%; TTM ROE 12.9% vs 9.4%; gross margin 12.6% vs 25.5%; operating margin 5.2% vs 10% — HII takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | HII | Value 68 vs 58 |
| Technicals | HII | Price vs 50-day -6% vs -12.4%; vs 200-day -19% vs -20% |
| Risk Resilience | LHX | Risk Resilience 50 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | LHX | Target upside 19.5% vs 28.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HII and LHX 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 LHX.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10LHX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LHX +1
- 44 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- LHX +1
- 44 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- LHX +3
- 49 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- LHX +1
- 50 vs 51
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 19 when LHX moved ahead of HII.
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 / 4 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (16.82%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.86%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
LHX 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 -0.7%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.14%, 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.
- 1HII closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 10 points behind, the largest single contributor to LHX's edge.
- 2HII's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3LHX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
HII leads on balance| Metric | HII | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.3% | 2.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 39.1% | 15% |
| Gross margin | 12.6% | 25.5% |
| Operating margin | 5.2% | 10% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 12.9% | 9.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.55 | 0.53 |
Performance
HII leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | HII | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.4% | -5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.8% | -14.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2.6% | -18% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -31.9% | -30.8% |
| Year to date | -17.2% | -12.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 4.3% | -8.6% |
Technicals
HII has the stronger structure| Metric | HII | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 27.4 | 17.4 |
| ADX (14) | 27.2 | 36 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6% | -12.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -19% | -20% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.9% | 21.7% |
Risk
LHX is the more resilient| Metric | HII | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.84 | 0.32 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.23 | -0.29 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.34 | -0.44 |
| Max drawdown | -40.8% | -34.4% |
| Current drawdown | -37.9% | -34.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 38.4% | 28.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HII or LHX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LHX is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 45 against HII's 44. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. HII 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 HII or LHX the better buy right now?
LHX 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 LHX over HII?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HII leads Value by 10 points; LHX leads Risk Resilience by 10 points; LHX leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HII or LHX?
Analyst price targets imply +19.5% upside for HII and +28.3% for LHX, so the Street currently favors LHX. 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, HII or LHX?
HII is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. HII on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, HII or LHX?
HII 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, HII or LHX?
LHX on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, HII or LHX?
LHX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LHX on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 HII more profitable than LHX?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 12.6% vs 25.5%; operating margin 5.2% vs 10%; ttm roe 12.9% vs 9.4%. HII leads on one measure and LHX 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 LHX's lead over HII getting stronger or weaker?
LHX 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 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-19, when LHX moved ahead of HII.
What would change the HII vs LHX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HII closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 10 points behind, the largest single contributor to LHX's edge; HII's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; LHX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 HII and LHX?
HII: 1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted. LHX: 1 bullish / 5 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 HII is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On LHX it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare HII and LHX 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.