HLN vs MRK Stock Comparison
Compare HLN and MRK across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HLN and MRK?
HLN leads the current stock comparison as Haleon plc, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Haleon plc vs Merck & Co., Inc.
HLN leads
HLN leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support HLN, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Haleon plc
Merck & Co., Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HLN over MRK, 49 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. HLN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while MRK holds the stronger momentum profile. HLN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLN today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. HLN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Haleon plc and Merck & Co., 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 HLN and MRK 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.
- Value56 vs 27HLN +29
- Momentum25 vs 52MRK +27
- Quality62 vs 47HLN +15
- Risk Resilience49 vs 36HLN +13
4 of 6 evidence groups favor HLN. HLN’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; MRK keeps a meaningful momentum 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: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No new signals fired.
HLN's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HLN and MRK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HLN (Haleon plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
MRK (Merck & Co., Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 51.6% against 21.8%.
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
HLNHLN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MRKMRK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
HLNHLN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 points.
Momentum
MRKMRK on the Momentum factor, by 27 points.
Lower downside
HLNHLN on Risk Resilience, by 13 points.
Analyst upside
HLNHLN 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 | HLN | MRK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11% | +4% | HLN has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +50.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 15 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | HLN | 49 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 0% vs 2%; TTM ROE 9.9% vs 6.6%; gross margin 65.6% vs 75.4%; operating margin 21.4% vs 16.7% |
| Valuation | HLN | Value 56 vs 27 |
| Technicals | MRK | Price vs 50-day -6.8% vs 6.1%; vs 200-day -6.3% vs 21.4% |
| Risk Resilience | HLN | Risk Resilience 49 vs 36 |
| Analyst expectations | HLN | Target upside 11% vs 4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HLN and MRK and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 8 points.
- 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 HLN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10HLN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- HLN +8
- 49 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- HLN +7
- 53 vs 46
- 30 sessions ago
- HLN +7
- 56 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- HLN +12
- 62 vs 50
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 18 when HLN moved ahead of MRK.
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 (0.18%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.84%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
HLN 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 -0.33%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.54%, 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.
- 1MRK closes the Value gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLN's edge.
- 2MRK generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3HLN'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
Split| Metric | HLN | MRK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0% | 2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | 68.6% |
| Gross margin | 65.6% | 75.4% |
| Operating margin | 21.4% | 16.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9.9% | 6.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.5 | 1.29 |
Performance
MRK leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | HLN | MRK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -7% | -4.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.9% | 8.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.5% | 21.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -7.8% | 24.5% |
| Year to date | -8.8% | 37.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -5.3% | 72.1% |
Technicals
MRK has the stronger structure| Metric | HLN | MRK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.2 | 43.3 |
| ADX (14) | 20.4 | 37.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.8% | 6.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -6.3% | 21.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.8% | 51.6% |
Risk
HLN is the more resilient| Metric | HLN | MRK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.07 | 0.18 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.3 | 1.78 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.49 | 3.69 |
| Max drawdown | -22.8% | -11.9% |
| Current drawdown | -18.2% | -7.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 23.1% | 30.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HLN or MRK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HLN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against MRK's 41. The edge comes from value and quality. MRK 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 HLN or MRK the better buy right now?
HLN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor HLN over MRK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HLN leads Value by 29 points; MRK leads Momentum by 27 points; HLN leads Quality by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HLN or MRK?
Analyst price targets imply +11% upside for HLN and +4% for MRK, so the Street currently favors HLN. 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, HLN or MRK?
HLN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. HLN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 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, HLN or MRK?
MRK 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, HLN or MRK?
MRK on the Momentum factor, by 27 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, HLN or MRK?
HLN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HLN on Risk Resilience, by 13 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 HLN more profitable than MRK?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 65.6% vs 75.4%; operating margin 21.4% vs 16.7%; ttm roe 9.9% vs 6.6%. HLN leads on two measures and MRK 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 HLN's lead over MRK getting stronger or weaker?
HLN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-18, when HLN moved ahead of MRK.
What would change the HLN vs MRK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MRK closes the Value gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLN's edge; MRK generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; HLN'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 HLN and MRK?
HLN: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. MRK: 3 bullish / 1 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 HLN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On MRK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare HLN and MRK 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.