HLIO vs HUBB Stock Comparison
HLIO currently leads HUBB in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 46 vs 45. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while HUBB has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between HLIO and HUBB?
HLIO leads the current stock comparison as Helios Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Helios Technologies, Inc. vs Hubbell Incorporated
HLIO leads
HLIO leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support HLIO, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Helios Technologies, Inc.
Hubbell Incorporated
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HLIO over HUBB, 46 versus 45 as of Nov 7, 2026. HLIO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience, while HUBB holds the stronger momentum profile. HLIO also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLIO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. HLIO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Helios Technologies, Inc. and Hubbell Incorporated 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 HLIO and HUBB 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.
- Momentum20 vs 24HUBB +4
- Risk Resilience54 vs 50HLIO +4
- Quality52 vs 50Even
- Value56 vs 54Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor HLIO. HLIO’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience; HUBB keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-11-06, compared against the prior scored session 2026-11-05.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
HLIO's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HLIO and HUBB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HLIO (Helios Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience.
HUBB (Hubbell Incorporated): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, 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
HLIOHLIO 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
HUBBHUBB on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
HLIOHLIO on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
HLIOHLIO 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 | HLIO | HUBB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +73.2% | +30% | HLIO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +71.8% | +20.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 7 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | HLIO | HUBB |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 0.00% | 7.72% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.360 | $3.710 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.360 | $5.380 |
| Years increased | 0 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #349 | #150 |
HUBB grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 7.72% a year against HLIO's 0.00%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLIO. 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 | 46 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | HUBB | TTM ROE 7.6% vs 23.2%; gross margin 32.7% vs 35.4%; operating margin 10% vs 20.3% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 56 vs 54 |
| Technicals | HUBB | Price vs 50-day -30.5% vs -5.8%; vs 200-day -17.3% vs -11.8% |
| Risk Resilience | HLIO | Risk Resilience 54 vs 50 |
| Analyst expectations | HLIO | Target upside 73.2% vs 30% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HLIO and HUBB 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 leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 HLIO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 8 – Nov 6HLIO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- HLIO +1
- 46 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- HLIO +9
- 51 vs 42
- 30 sessions ago
- HLIO +3
- 53 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- HLIO +7
- 50 vs 43
The lead changed hands 11 times in this window, most recently on Oct 15 when HLIO moved ahead of HUBB.
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 / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only HLIO
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
HLIO 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -21.05%, AIQ -2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.55%, 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.
- 1HUBB closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 4 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLIO's edge.
- 2HUBB's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3HLIO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 4 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
HUBB leads on balance| Metric | HLIO | HUBB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.5% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 10% | — |
| Gross margin | 32.7% | 35.4% |
| Operating margin | 10% | 20.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.6% | 23.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | 1.25 |
Performance
HUBB leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | HLIO | HUBB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -11.4% | 1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -16.3% | -9.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -26.3% | -14.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -7% | -12.8% |
| Year to date | -8.6% | -3.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -2.2% | -8.2% |
Technicals
HUBB has the stronger structure| Metric | HLIO | HUBB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 18.9 | 38.1 |
| ADX (14) | 24.5 | 24.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -30.5% | -5.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -17.3% | -11.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 60.4% | 39.3% |
Risk
HLIO is the more resilient| Metric | HLIO | HUBB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.47 | 1.15 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.23 | -0.18 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.29 | -0.25 |
| Max drawdown | -48.9% | -24.9% |
| Current drawdown | -48.9% | -23% |
| Annualized volatility | 44.6% | 32.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -3.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HLIO or HUBB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HLIO is the stronger of the two as of Nov 7, 2026, scoring 46 against HUBB's 45. The edge comes from risk resilience. HUBB is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 HLIO or HUBB the better buy right now?
HLIO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Nov 7, 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 HLIO over HUBB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HUBB leads Momentum by 4 points; HLIO leads Risk Resilience by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HLIO or HUBB?
Analyst price targets imply +73.2% upside for HLIO and +30% for HUBB, so the Street currently favors HLIO. 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, HLIO or HUBB?
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, HLIO or HUBB?
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, HLIO or HUBB?
HUBB 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, HLIO or HUBB?
HLIO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HLIO on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 HLIO more profitable than HUBB?
HUBB leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 32.7% vs 35.4%; operating margin 10% vs 20.3%; ttm roe 7.6% vs 23.2%.
Is HLIO's lead over HUBB getting stronger or weaker?
HLIO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-08 and 2026-11-06. The lead has changed hands 11 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-15, when HLIO moved ahead of HUBB.
What would change the HLIO vs HUBB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HUBB closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 4 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLIO's edge; HUBB's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; HLIO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 4 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 HLIO and HUBB?
HLIO: 2 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. HUBB: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 HLIO is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On HUBB it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare HLIO and HUBB 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.