HST vs LTC Stock Comparison
Compare HST and LTC across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HST and LTC?
LTC leads the current stock comparison as LTC Properties, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. vs LTC Properties, Inc.
LTC leads
LTC leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 9 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 3 of 6 evidence groups support LTC, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
LTC Properties, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LTC over HST, 63 versus 51 as of Sep 11, 2026. LTC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while HST holds the stronger risk resilience profile. LTC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LTC today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. LTC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. and LTC Properties, 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 HST and LTC 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.
- Momentum32 vs 76LTC +44
- Quality39 vs 63LTC +24
- Risk Resilience75 vs 52HST +23
- Value68 vs 58HST +10
3 of 6 evidence groups favor LTC. LTC’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; HST keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 -3
No new signals fired.
LTC's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HST and LTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LTC (LTC Properties, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
HST (Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, value, 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
LTCLTC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
LTCLTC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
HSTHST on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
LTCLTC on the Momentum factor, by 44 points.
Lower downside
HSTHST on Risk Resilience, by 23 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | HST | LTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +12.5% | +12% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +16% | +27.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 3 | 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 LTC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | LTC | 51 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | LTCon balance | EPS growth -52.1% vs 18.7%; TTM ROE 15.5% vs 12.3%; gross margin 15.8% vs 67.4%; operating margin 14.4% vs 39.3% — LTC takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | HST | Value 68 vs 58 |
| Technicals | LTC | Price vs 50-day -4.8% vs 4.5%; vs 200-day 5.4% vs 11.6% |
| Risk Resilience | HST | Risk Resilience 75 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 12.5% vs 12% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HST and LTC and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 LTC.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10LTC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LTC +12
- 51 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- LTC +9
- 52 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- LTC +9
- 49 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- LTC +10
- 53 vs 63
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 13 when LTC moved ahead of HST.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.18%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
5 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.19%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
HST is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 +0.45%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.54%, 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.
- 1HST closes the Momentum gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to LTC's edge.
- 2HST's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3LTC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
LTC leads on balance| Metric | HST | LTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.3% | 3.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -52.1% | 18.7% |
| Gross margin | 15.8% | 67.4% |
| Operating margin | 14.4% | 39.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 15.5% | 12.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.88 | 0.61 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | HST | LTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.1% | 2.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.9% | 9.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.6% | 13.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 15.4% | 9.7% |
| Year to date | 24.9% | 22.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 27.3% | 16.1% |
Technicals
LTC has the stronger structure| Metric | HST | LTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 30.9 | 66.7 |
| ADX (14) | 29.2 | 22.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.8% | 4.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 5.4% | 11.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.6% | 19.7% |
Risk
HST is the more resilient| Metric | HST | LTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.65 | -0.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.92 | 0.65 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.37 | 0.94 |
| Max drawdown | -15.3% | -13.6% |
| Current drawdown | -13.3% | -0.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 25.3% | 20.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HST or LTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LTC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 63 against HST's 51. The edge comes from momentum and quality. HST is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 HST or LTC the better buy right now?
LTC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LTC over HST?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LTC leads Momentum by 44 points; LTC leads Quality by 24 points; HST leads Risk Resilience by 23 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HST or LTC?
Analyst price targets imply +12.5% upside for HST and +12% for LTC. 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, HST or LTC?
HST is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. HST 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, HST or LTC?
LTC 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, HST or LTC?
LTC on the Momentum factor, by 44 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, HST or LTC?
HST is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HST on Risk Resilience, by 23 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 HST more profitable than LTC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 15.8% vs 67.4%; operating margin 14.4% vs 39.3%; ttm roe 15.5% vs 12.3%. HST leads on one measure and LTC 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 LTC's lead over HST getting stronger or weaker?
LTC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 12 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 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-13, when LTC moved ahead of HST.
What would change the HST vs LTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HST closes the Momentum gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to LTC's edge; HST's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; LTC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 HST and LTC?
HST: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. LTC: 5 bullish / 0 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 HST is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On LTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare HST and LTC 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.