HXL vs LHX Stock Comparison
Compare HXL and LHX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between HXL and LHX?
LHX leads the current stock comparison as L3Harris Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Hexcel Corporation vs L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
LHX leads
LHX leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value, but the lead has narrowed from 11 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support LHX, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Hexcel Corporation
L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LHX over HXL, 45 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. LHX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while HXL holds the stronger risk resilience profile. LHX also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LHX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. LHX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Hexcel Corporation and L3Harris Technologies, 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 HXL and LHX 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.
- Value36 vs 58LHX +22
- Risk Resilience71 vs 60HXL +11
- Momentum30 vs 21HXL +9
- Quality41 vs 43Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor LHX. LHX’s edge is concentrated in value; HXL 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 -1
No new signals fired.
LHX's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HXL and LHX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LHX (L3Harris Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
HXL (Hexcel Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience, momentum, 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
LHXLHX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HXLHXL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
LHXLHX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 points.
Momentum
HXLHXL on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
HXLHXL on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
LHXLHX 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 | HXL | LHX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10% | +28.3% | LHX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +46.1% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 1 | 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 LHX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | LHX | 41 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | HXLon balance | revenue growth 7% vs 2.4%; EPS growth 32.7% vs 15%; TTM ROE 11.4% vs 9.4%; gross margin 24.5% vs 25.5%; operating margin 11.5% vs 10% — HXL takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LHX | Value 36 vs 58 |
| Technicals | HXL | Price vs 50-day -7.2% vs -12.4%; vs 200-day 1.9% vs -20% |
| Risk Resilience | HXL | Risk Resilience 71 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | LHX | Target upside 10% vs 28.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HXL and LHX 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 LHX.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10LHX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LHX +4
- 41 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- LHX +4
- 41 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- LHX +11
- 41 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- LHX +2
- 49 vs 51
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Jul 30 when HXL moved ahead of LHX.
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, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.46%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.86%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
LHX 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 +3.25%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.14%, 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.
- 1HXL closes the Value gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to LHX's edge.
- 2HXL's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3LHX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate LHX's advantage entirely.
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
HXL leads on balance| Metric | HXL | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 7% | 2.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 32.7% | 15% |
| Gross margin | 24.5% | 25.5% |
| Operating margin | 11.5% | 10% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.4% | 9.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.74 | 0.53 |
Performance
HXL leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | HXL | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.1% | -5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -12.2% | -14.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1.9% | -18% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.1% | -30.8% |
| Year to date | 21.5% | -12.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 39.6% | -8.6% |
Technicals
HXL has the stronger structure| Metric | HXL | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 29.1 | 17.4 |
| ADX (14) | 35.9 | 36 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.2% | -12.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.9% | -20% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.3% | 21.7% |
Risk
HXL is the more resilient| Metric | HXL | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.97 | 0.32 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.14 | -0.29 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.15 | -0.44 |
| Max drawdown | -18.6% | -34.4% |
| Current drawdown | -18.6% | -34.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.5% | 28.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HXL or LHX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LHX is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 45 against HXL's 41. The edge comes from value. HXL 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 HXL or LHX the better buy right now?
LHX 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 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LHX over HXL?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LHX leads Value by 22 points; HXL leads Risk Resilience by 11 points; HXL leads Momentum by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HXL or LHX?
Analyst price targets imply +10% upside for HXL and +28.3% for LHX, so the Street currently favors LHX. 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, HXL or LHX?
LHX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LHX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 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, HXL or LHX?
HXL 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, HXL or LHX?
HXL on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, HXL or LHX?
HXL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HXL on Risk Resilience, by 11 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 HXL more profitable than LHX?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 24.5% vs 25.5%; operating margin 11.5% vs 10%; ttm roe 11.4% vs 9.4%. HXL leads on two measures and LHX 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 LHX's lead over HXL getting stronger or weaker?
LHX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 4 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-30, when HXL moved ahead of LHX.
What would change the HXL vs LHX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HXL closes the Value gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to LHX's edge; HXL's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; LHX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate LHX's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about HXL and LHX?
HXL: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. LHX: 1 bullish / 5 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 HXL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On LHX it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare HXL and LHX 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.