HLNE vs IVZ Stock Comparison
Compare HLNE and IVZ across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HLNE and IVZ?
IVZ leads the current stock comparison as Invesco Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Hamilton Lane Incorporated vs Invesco Ltd.
IVZ leads
IVZ leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from HLNE. Wall Street currently favors HLNE on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support IVZ, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Hamilton Lane Incorporated
Invesco Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors IVZ over HLNE, 56 versus 54 as of Sep 11, 2026. IVZ's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while HLNE holds the stronger quality profile. IVZ also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors HLNE. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IVZ today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. IVZ lead: Reversed — HLNE led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IVZ now leads by 2.
Compare Hamilton Lane Incorporated and Invesco Ltd. 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 HLNE and IVZ 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.
- Momentum35 vs 65IVZ +30
- Quality85 vs 58HLNE +27
- Value35 vs 50IVZ +15
- Risk Resilience63 vs 51HLNE +12
2 of 6 evidence groups favor IVZ. IVZ’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; HLNE keeps a meaningful quality 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: Momentum -4
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No new signals fired.
IVZ's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HLNE and IVZ both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
IVZ (Invesco Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
HLNE (Hamilton Lane Incorporated): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, fundamentals — but at materially higher volatility, 37.8% against 25.3%.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
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
IVZIVZ on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HLNEHLNE on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
IVZIVZ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
IVZIVZ on the Momentum factor, by 30 points.
Lower downside
HLNEHLNE on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
HLNEHLNE on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors IVZ, analyst targets favor HLNE. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | HLNE | IVZ | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +42.2% | -3.7% | HLNE has more room |
| Target dispersion | +64.5% | +41.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 5 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IVZ. 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 | 54 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | HLNEon balance | revenue growth 42.2% vs 4.6%; EPS growth 22.8% vs 51%; gross margin 69.9% vs 67.4%; operating margin 43.6% vs -7.1% — HLNE takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | IVZ | Value 35 vs 50 |
| Technicals | IVZ | Price vs 50-day 1.6% vs 4.9%; vs 200-day -9.7% vs 16.6% |
| Risk Resilience | HLNE | Risk Resilience 63 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | HLNE | Target upside 42.2% vs -3.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HLNE and IVZ 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 IVZ.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10IVZ lead: Reversed — HLNE led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IVZ now leads by 2.
- Today
- IVZ +2
- 54 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- HLNE +3
- 60 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- HLNE +3
- 63 vs 60
- 90 sessions ago
- HLNE +2
- 55 vs 53
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Jul 24 when HLNE moved ahead of IVZ.
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 / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (12.37%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.41%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
IVZ 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 +0.2%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.1%, 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.
- 1HLNE closes the Momentum gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to IVZ's edge.
- 2HLNE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3IVZ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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
HLNE leads on balance| Metric | HLNE | IVZ |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 42.2% | 4.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 22.8% | 51% |
| Gross margin | 69.9% | 67.4% |
| Operating margin | 43.6% | -7.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 31% | -0.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.39 | 0.13 |
Performance
IVZ leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | HLNE | IVZ |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -7.1% | 0.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.3% | 1.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 22.7% | 16.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -2.4% | 33.3% |
| Year to date | -28.7% | 21.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -35.6% | 45.1% |
Technicals
IVZ has the stronger structure| Metric | HLNE | IVZ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 32.6 | 54.7 |
| ADX (14) | 27.5 | 17.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.6% | 4.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -9.7% | 16.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.8% | 25.3% |
Risk
HLNE is the more resilient| Metric | HLNE | IVZ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.17 | 1.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.92 | 1.12 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.39 | 1.63 |
| Max drawdown | -52% | -22.7% |
| Current drawdown | -37.7% | -4.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 42.2% | 34.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.6% | -3.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HLNE or IVZ?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, IVZ is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 56 against HLNE's 54. The edge comes from momentum and value. HLNE is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 HLNE or IVZ the better buy right now?
IVZ 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 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor IVZ over HLNE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. IVZ leads Momentum by 30 points; HLNE leads Quality by 27 points; IVZ leads Value by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HLNE or IVZ?
Analyst price targets imply +42.2% upside for HLNE and -3.7% for IVZ, so the Street currently favors HLNE. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors IVZ. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, HLNE or IVZ?
IVZ is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. IVZ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, HLNE or IVZ?
HLNE 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, HLNE or IVZ?
IVZ on the Momentum factor, by 30 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, HLNE or IVZ?
HLNE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HLNE on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 HLNE more profitable than IVZ?
HLNE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 69.9% vs 67.4%; operating margin 43.6% vs -7.1%; ttm roe 31% vs -0.5%.
Is IVZ's lead over HLNE getting stronger or weaker?
IVZ lead: Reversed — HLNE led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IVZ now leads by 2. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-24, when HLNE moved ahead of IVZ.
What would change the HLNE vs IVZ verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HLNE closes the Momentum gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to IVZ's edge; HLNE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; IVZ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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 HLNE and IVZ?
HLNE: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. IVZ: 3 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. The most decision-relevant rule on HLNE is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On IVZ it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare HLNE and IVZ 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.