HLIO vs IR Stock Comparison
Compare HLIO and IR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HLIO and IR?
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 Ingersoll Rand Inc.
HLIO leads
HLIO leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support HLIO, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Helios Technologies, Inc.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HLIO over IR, 49 versus 46 as of Sep 11, 2026. HLIO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience. HLIO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLIO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. HLIO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Helios Technologies, Inc. and Ingersoll Rand 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 HLIO and IR 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 Resilience69 vs 64HLIO +5
- Quality52 vs 49Even
- Value56 vs 53Even
- Momentum24 vs 23Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor HLIO. HLIO’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience.
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
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.63%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
HLIO's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HLIO and IR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HLIO (Helios Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience.
IR (Ingersoll Rand Inc.): the counter-case, on fundamentals.
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
IRIR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
HLIOHLIO on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 | IR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +26.7% | +22% | HLIO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +16.8% | +25.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 5 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 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 | 49 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | IR | revenue growth 1.5% vs 10.9%; EPS growth 10% vs 34.7%; TTM ROE 7.6% vs 9.5%; gross margin 32.7% vs 37.9%; operating margin 10% vs 21.5% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 56 vs 53 |
| Technicals | HLIO | Price vs 50-day -9.6% vs -10.2%; vs 200-day -0.4% vs -10.9% |
| Risk Resilience | HLIO | Risk Resilience 69 vs 64 |
| Analyst expectations | HLIO | Target upside 26.7% vs 22% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HLIO and IR 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 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 HLIO.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10HLIO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- HLIO +3
- 49 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- HLIO +4
- 50 vs 46
- 30 sessions ago
- HLIO +5
- 52 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- IR +2
- 52 vs 54
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 10 when IR moved ahead of HLIO.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (9.83%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.01%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +3.82%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.22%, 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.
- 1IR closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 5 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLIO's edge.
- 2IR'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 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
IR leads on balance| Metric | HLIO | IR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.5% | 10.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 10% | 34.7% |
| Gross margin | 32.7% | 37.9% |
| Operating margin | 10% | 21.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.6% | 9.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | 0.47 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | HLIO | IR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.5% | -2.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -15.2% | -13.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.9% | 3.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 0.6% | -14.2% |
| Year to date | 27.2% | -7.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 25.5% | -9.1% |
Technicals
HLIO has the stronger structure| Metric | HLIO | IR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 19.4 | 29 |
| ADX (14) | 31.3 | 27.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.6% | -10.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.4% | -10.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.1% | 21.5% |
Risk
HLIO is the more resilient| Metric | HLIO | IR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.52 | 1.21 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.69 | -0.22 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.33 | -0.4 |
| Max drawdown | -26.7% | -30.6% |
| Current drawdown | -26.7% | -26% |
| Annualized volatility | 39.4% | 32.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.4% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HLIO or IR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HLIO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against IR's 46. The edge comes from risk resilience. 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 IR the better buy right now?
HLIO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor HLIO over IR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HLIO leads Risk Resilience by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HLIO or IR?
Analyst price targets imply +26.7% upside for HLIO and +22% for IR, 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 IR?
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 IR?
IR 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, HLIO or IR?
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, HLIO or IR?
HLIO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HLIO on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 IR?
IR leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 32.7% vs 37.9%; operating margin 10% vs 21.5%; ttm roe 7.6% vs 9.5%.
Is HLIO's lead over IR getting stronger or weaker?
HLIO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 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 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-10, when IR moved ahead of HLIO.
What would change the HLIO vs IR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: IR closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 5 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLIO's edge; IR'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 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 HLIO and IR?
HLIO: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. IR: 1 bullish / 4 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 HLIO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On IR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare HLIO and IR 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.