INDB vs NTRS Stock Comparison
INDB currently leads NTRS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 51. The clearest difference is momentum, while NTRS has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between INDB and NTRS?
INDB leads the current stock comparison as Independent Bank Corp., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Independent Bank Corp. vs Northern Trust Corporation
INDB leads
INDB leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support INDB, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Independent Bank Corp.
Northern Trust Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors INDB over NTRS, 59 versus 51 as of Oct 21, 2026. INDB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while NTRS holds the stronger risk resilience profile. INDB also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INDB today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. INDB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Independent Bank Corp. and Northern Trust Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare INDB and NTRS 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.
- Momentum61 vs 39INDB +22
- Risk Resilience59 vs 77NTRS +18
- Quality67 vs 56INDB +11
- Value51 vs 42INDB +9
5 of 6 evidence groups favor INDB. INDB’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; NTRS keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +14
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
INDB's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INDB and NTRS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
INDB (Independent Bank Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
NTRS (Northern Trust Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience.
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
INDBINDB on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NTRSNTRS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
INDBINDB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 points.
Momentum
INDBINDB on the Momentum factor, by 22 points.
Lower downside
NTRSNTRS on Risk Resilience, by 18 points.
Analyst upside
INDBINDB 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 | INDB | NTRS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16.9% | +9.3% | INDB has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +13.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 7 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | INDB | NTRS |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 5.10% | 2.06% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.840 | $2.800 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.360 | $3.100 |
| Years increased | 5 | 3 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #249 | #327 |
INDB grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 5.10% a year against NTRS's 2.06%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INDB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | INDB | 59 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | INDBon balance | revenue growth 19.5% vs 11.3%; EPS growth 11.8% vs 56.2%; TTM ROE 9.3% vs 17.1%; gross margin 73.8% vs 59.8%; operating margin 28.2% vs 19.8% — INDB takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | INDB | Value 51 vs 42 |
| Technicals | INDB | Price vs 50-day -0.1% vs -6.6%; vs 200-day 0.7% vs 0.6% |
| Risk Resilience | NTRS | Risk Resilience 59 vs 77 |
| Analyst expectations | INDB | Target upside 16.9% vs 9.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INDB and NTRS 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 8 points.
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 INDB.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20INDB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- INDB +8
- 59 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 49 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- INDB +1
- 49 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- NTRS +3
- 59 vs 62
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Sep 14 when INDB moved ahead of NTRS.
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
Only INDB
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only NTRS
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
NTRS 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.52%, AIQ +3 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.89%, 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.
- 1NTRS closes the Momentum gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to INDB's edge.
- 2NTRS's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3INDB'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
INDB leads on balance| Metric | INDB | NTRS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 19.5% | 11.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 11.8% | 56.2% |
| Gross margin | 73.8% | 59.8% |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | 19.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9.3% | 17.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.18 | 1.18 |
Performance
INDB leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | INDB | NTRS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5.4% | -1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.7% | -4.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.2% | -7.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 4.1% | 3.5% |
| Year to date | 10.7% | 21.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 25.6% | 32.8% |
Technicals
INDB has the stronger structure| Metric | INDB | NTRS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 63 | 39.5 |
| ADX (14) | 25.5 | 38.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.1% | -6.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.7% | 0.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.7% | 17% |
Risk
NTRS is the more resilient| Metric | INDB | NTRS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.5 | 0.91 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.84 | 1.11 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.34 | 1.77 |
| Max drawdown | -14.4% | -15.1% |
| Current drawdown | -7.2% | -13.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.1% | 24.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INDB or NTRS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, INDB is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 59 against NTRS's 51. The edge comes from momentum and quality. NTRS 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 INDB or NTRS the better buy right now?
INDB carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 INDB over NTRS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. INDB leads Momentum by 22 points; NTRS leads Risk Resilience by 18 points; INDB leads Quality by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INDB or NTRS?
Analyst price targets imply +16.9% upside for INDB and +9.3% for NTRS, so the Street currently favors INDB. 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, INDB or NTRS?
INDB is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. INDB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 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, INDB or NTRS?
NTRS 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, INDB or NTRS?
INDB on the Momentum factor, by 22 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, INDB or NTRS?
NTRS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NTRS on Risk Resilience, by 18 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 INDB more profitable than NTRS?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 73.8% vs 59.8%; operating margin 28.2% vs 19.8%; ttm roe 9.3% vs 17.1%. INDB leads on two measures and NTRS 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 INDB's lead over NTRS getting stronger or weaker?
INDB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-14, when INDB moved ahead of NTRS.
What would change the INDB vs NTRS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NTRS closes the Momentum gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to INDB's edge; NTRS's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; INDB'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 INDB and NTRS?
INDB: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. NTRS: 1 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 INDB is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NTRS it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare INDB and NTRS 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.