INVH vs O Stock Comparison
Compare INVH and O across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between INVH and O?
O leads the current stock comparison as Realty Income Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Invitation Homes Inc. vs Realty Income Corporation
O leads
O leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality. Wall Street currently favors INVH on target upside.
Fragile: 0 of 6 evidence groups support O.
Invitation Homes Inc.
Realty Income Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors O over INVH, 47 versus 45 as of Sep 6, 2026. O's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while INVH holds the stronger value profile. O also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors INVH. 0 of 6 covered evidence groups favor O today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points.
Compare Invitation Homes Inc. and Realty Income Corporation 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 INVH and O 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.
- Quality30%43 vs 62O +19
- Value30%43 vs 28INVH +15
- Risk Resilience15%74 vs 77Even
- Momentum25%31 vs 33Even
0 of 6 evidence groups favor O. O’s edge is concentrated in quality; INVH keeps a meaningful value edge.
The central trade-off
O (Realty Income Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
INVH (Invitation Homes Inc.): the counter-case, on value, fundamentals, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 16.8% against 11.5%.
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
OO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
INVHINVH on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
INVHINVH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
OO carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
INVHINVH on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors O, analyst targets favor INVH. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | INVH | O | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.4% | +9.4% | INVH has more room |
| Target dispersion | +25.5% | +10.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 10 | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
0 of 6 covered evidence groups favor O. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 45 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | INVHon balance | revenue growth 1.8% vs -7.8%; EPS growth 42.3% vs 12.1%; TTM ROE 7.1% vs 3.4%; gross margin 44.4% vs 68.6%; operating margin 30.2% vs 29.2% — INVH takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | INVH | Value 43 vs 28 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -5% vs -3.2%; vs 200-day 1.8% vs -1% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 74 vs 77 |
| Analyst expectations | INVH | Target upside 10.4% vs 9.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INVH and O 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 0 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 O.
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.
- 1INVH closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to O's edge.
- 2INVH generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3O starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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 | O |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.8% | -7.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 42.3% | 12.1% |
| Gross margin | 44.4% | 68.6% |
| Operating margin | 30.2% | 29.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.1% | 3.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.94 | 0.07 |
Performance
O leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | INVH | O |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.9% | -1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6.5% | -2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.5% | 0.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 8.3% | -5.8% |
| Year to date | 2.2% | 8.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -6.1% | 5.7% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | INVH | O |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 29.6 | 39.5 |
| ADX (14) | 18.9 | 12.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5% | -3.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.8% | -1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 16.8% | 11.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INVH or O?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, O is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 47 against INVH's 45. The edge comes from quality. INVH 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 O the better buy right now?
O carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 0 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor O over INVH?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. O leads Quality by 19 points; INVH leads Value by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INVH or O?
Analyst price targets imply +10.4% upside for INVH and +9.4% for O, so the Street currently favors INVH. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors O. 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 O?
INVH is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. INVH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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 O?
INVH 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 O?
The two are level on Momentum. Momentum carries 25% of 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 O?
O is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. O carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is INVH more profitable than O?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 44.4% vs 68.6%; operating margin 30.2% vs 29.2%; ttm roe 7.1% vs 3.4%. INVH leads on two measures and O 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.
What would change the INVH vs O verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: INVH closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to O's edge; INVH generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; o starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
Compare INVH and O with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.