HUT vs MARA Stock Comparison
Compare HUT and MARA across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HUT and MARA?
HUT leads the current stock comparison as Hut 8 Corp., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Hut 8 Corp. vs Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc.
HUT leads
HUT leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support HUT, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Hut 8 Corp.
Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HUT over MARA, 39 versus 32 as of Sep 11, 2026. HUT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while MARA holds the stronger momentum profile. HUT also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HUT today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. HUT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Hut 8 Corp. and Marathon Digital Holdings, 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 HUT and MARA 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.
- Quality37 vs 8HUT +29
- Risk Resilience24 vs 16HUT +8
- Momentum57 vs 64MARA +7
- Value34 vs 36Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor HUT. HUT’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; MARA 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: Momentum -23
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -11
No new signals fired.
HUT's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HUT and MARA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HUT (Hut 8 Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
MARA (Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum — but at materially higher volatility, 101.8% against 94.4%.
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
HUTHUT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MARAMARA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
MARAMARA on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
HUTHUT on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
HUTHUT 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 | HUT | MARA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +51% | -17.5% | HUT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +122.9% | +116.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HUT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | HUT | 39 vs 32 |
| Fundamentals | HUTon balance | EPS growth 35.9% vs 51.7%; TTM ROE -39.5% vs -110.4%; gross margin 25.3% vs -8.5%; operating margin -31.1% vs -99.6% — HUT takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 34 vs 36 |
| Technicals | HUT | Price vs 50-day 4.5% vs 6.1%; vs 200-day 19.2% vs 4.6% |
| Risk Resilience | HUT | Risk Resilience 24 vs 16 |
| Analyst expectations | HUT | Target upside 51% vs -17.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HUT and MARA 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 moderate at 7 points.
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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)
- 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 HUT.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10HUT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- HUT +7
- 39 vs 32
- 7 sessions ago
- HUT +9
- 39 vs 30
- 30 sessions ago
- HUT +9
- 32 vs 23
- 90 sessions ago
- HUT +8
- 30 vs 22
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (24.20%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (8.83%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.35%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
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 6 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +8.83%, AIQ -6 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +4.81%, AIQ -2 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.
- 1MARA closes the Quality gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to HUT's edge.
- 2MARA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3HUT'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
HUT leads on balance| Metric | HUT | MARA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.5% | 0.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 35.9% | 51.7% |
| Gross margin | 25.3% | -8.5% |
| Operating margin | -31.1% | -99.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -39.5% | -110.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.31 | 1.49 |
Performance
HUT leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | HUT | MARA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 12.3% | 9.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.2% | 18.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.3% | -9.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 77.2% | 33.7% |
| Year to date | 97.2% | 27.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 255.6% | -24.8% |
Technicals
HUT has the stronger structure| Metric | HUT | MARA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.7 | 52.1 |
| ADX (14) | 14.7 | 20.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.5% | 6.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 19.2% | 4.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 94.4% | 101.8% |
Risk
HUT is the more resilient| Metric | HUT | MARA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.45 | 3.32 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.54 | 0 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.72 | 0 |
| Max drawdown | -41.7% | -70.5% |
| Current drawdown | -31.9% | -50% |
| Annualized volatility | 108.3% | 86.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -9.7% | -7.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HUT or MARA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HUT is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 39 against MARA's 32. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. MARA 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 HUT or MARA the better buy right now?
HUT carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 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 HUT over MARA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HUT leads Quality by 29 points; HUT leads Risk Resilience by 8 points; MARA leads Momentum by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HUT or MARA?
Analyst price targets imply +51% upside for HUT and -17.5% for MARA, so the Street currently favors HUT. 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, HUT or MARA?
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, HUT or MARA?
MARA 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, HUT or MARA?
MARA on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, HUT or MARA?
HUT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HUT on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 HUT more profitable than MARA?
HUT leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 25.3% vs -8.5%; operating margin -31.1% vs -99.6%; ttm roe -39.5% vs -110.4%.
Is HUT's lead over MARA getting stronger or weaker?
HUT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the HUT vs MARA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MARA closes the Quality gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to HUT's edge; MARA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; HUT'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 HUT and MARA?
HUT: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. MARA: 3 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on HUT is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On MARA it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare HUT and MARA 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.