INVH vs IRT Stock Comparison
INVH currently leads IRT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 49 vs 44. The clearest difference is quality, while IRT has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between INVH and IRT?
INVH leads the current stock comparison as Invitation Homes Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Invitation Homes Inc. vs Independence Realty Trust, Inc.
INVH leads
INVH leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors IRT on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support INVH, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Invitation Homes Inc.
Independence Realty Trust, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors INVH over IRT, 49 versus 44 as of Oct 21, 2026. INVH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while IRT holds the stronger value profile. INVH also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors IRT. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INVH today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. INVH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Invitation Homes Inc. and Independence Realty Trust, Inc. 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 INVH and IRT 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.
- Quality43 vs 21INVH +22
- Risk Resilience73 vs 57INVH +16
- Value43 vs 56IRT +13
- Momentum50 vs 49Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor INVH. INVH’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; IRT keeps a meaningful value 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 +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +15
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
INVH's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INVH and IRT both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
INVH (Invitation Homes Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
IRT (Independence Realty Trust, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations.
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
INVHINVH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
IRTIRT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
IRTIRT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
INVHINVH on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
IRTIRT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors INVH, analyst targets favor IRT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | INVH | IRT | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +17.2% | +26% | IRT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +25.5% | +16.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 12 | 3 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | INVH | IRT |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 14.29% | 4.41% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.600 | $0.540 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.170 | $0.670 |
| Years increased | 4 | 4 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
INVH grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 14.29% a year against IRT's 4.41%.
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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INVH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | INVH | 49 vs 44 |
| Fundamentals | INVHon balance | revenue growth 1.8% vs 1.2%; EPS growth 42.3% vs 49%; TTM ROE 7.1% vs 1.3%; gross margin 44.4% vs 1%; operating margin 30.2% vs 17% — INVH takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | IRT | Value 43 vs 56 |
| Technicals | INVH | Price vs 50-day -4% vs -4.2%; vs 200-day -2.9% vs -8.1% |
| Risk Resilience | INVH | Risk Resilience 73 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | IRT | Target upside 17.2% vs 26% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INVH and IRT and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 INVH.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20INVH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- INVH +5
- 49 vs 44
- 7 sessions ago
- INVH +5
- 48 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- INVH +4
- 43 vs 39
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 46 vs 46
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
Only INVH
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.45%)
1 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted
Only IRT
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.42%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (1.1%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
IRT 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 is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.7%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.2%, AIQ +4 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.
- 1IRT closes the Quality gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to INVH's edge.
- 2IRT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3INVH'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
INVH leads on balance| Metric | INVH | IRT |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.8% | 1.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 42.3% | 49% |
| Gross margin | 44.4% | 1% |
| Operating margin | 30.2% | 17% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.1% | 1.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.94 | 0.73 |
Performance
INVH leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | INVH | IRT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.5% | 0% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.5% | 0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.5% | -9.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 0.2% | -6.6% |
| Year to date | -2.8% | -15% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -5.1% | -7.6% |
Technicals
INVH has the stronger structure| Metric | INVH | IRT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 59.1 | 58.3 |
| ADX (14) | 35.2 | 20.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4% | -4.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.9% | -8.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 17.9% | 19.1% |
Risk
INVH is the more resilient| Metric | INVH | IRT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.08 | 0.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.34 | -0.43 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.53 | -0.61 |
| Max drawdown | -15.6% | -18.7% |
| Current drawdown | -11.7% | -16.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 21.1% | 21.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INVH or IRT?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, INVH is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 49 against IRT's 44. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. IRT is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 INVH or IRT the better buy right now?
INVH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor INVH over IRT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. INVH leads Quality by 22 points; INVH leads Risk Resilience by 16 points; IRT leads Value by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INVH or IRT?
Analyst price targets imply +17.2% upside for INVH and +26% for IRT, so the Street currently favors IRT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors INVH. 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, INVH or IRT?
IRT is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. IRT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 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, INVH or IRT?
IRT 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, INVH or IRT?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, INVH or IRT?
INVH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. INVH on Risk Resilience, by 16 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 INVH more profitable than IRT?
INVH leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 44.4% vs 1%; operating margin 30.2% vs 17%; ttm roe 7.1% vs 1.3%.
Is INVH's lead over IRT getting stronger or weaker?
INVH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the INVH vs IRT verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: IRT closes the Quality gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to INVH's edge; IRT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; INVH'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 INVH and IRT?
INVH: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. IRT: 1 bullish / 3 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 INVH is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On IRT it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare INVH and IRT 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.