KIM vs KRC Stock Comparison
KRC currently leads KIM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 55 vs 53. The clearest difference is value, while KIM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between KIM and KRC?
KRC leads the current stock comparison as Kilroy Realty Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Kimco Realty Corporation vs Kilroy Realty Corporation
KRC leads
KRC leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Value. Wall Street currently favors KIM on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support KRC, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Kimco Realty Corporation
Kilroy Realty Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KRC over KIM, 55 versus 53 as of Oct 21, 2026. KRC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while KIM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. KRC also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors KIM. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KRC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. KRC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Kimco Realty Corporation and Kilroy Realty 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 KIM and KRC 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.
- Risk Resilience79 vs 52KIM +27
- Value42 vs 67KRC +25
- Quality48 vs 42KIM +6
- Momentum56 vs 58Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor KRC. KRC’s edge is concentrated in value; KIM 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 +9
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +15
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
KRC's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — KIM and KRC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KRC (Kilroy Realty Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
KIM (Kimco Realty Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality, fundamentals.
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
KRCKRC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
KRCKRC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
KRCKRC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
KIMKIM on Risk Resilience, by 27 points.
Analyst upside
KIMKIM on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors KRC, analyst targets favor KIM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | KIM | KRC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16% | +10.4% | KIM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +22.8% | +34.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 8 | 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 | KIM | KRC |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 13.34% | 1.86% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.540 | $1.970 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.010 | $2.160 |
| Years increased | 4 | 3 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #26 |
KIM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 13.34% a year against KRC's 1.86%. KRC never reduced its regular dividend in the window; KIM did in 1 year.
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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KRC. 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 | 53 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | KIMon balance | revenue growth -1.3% vs 0.9%; EPS growth 4.3% vs 206.3%; TTM ROE 5.8% vs 3.2%; gross margin 54.8% vs 48.7%; operating margin 35.8% vs 25.1% — KIM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | KRC | Value 42 vs 67 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -1.8% vs -2.2%; vs 200-day -1.7% vs 0.6% |
| Risk Resilience | KIM | Risk Resilience 79 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | KIM | Target upside 16% vs 10.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of KIM and KRC 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 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 KRC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20KRC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- KRC +2
- 53 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- KRC +1
- 51 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- KRC +3
- 45 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- KRC +2
- 47 vs 49
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jul 30 when KRC moved ahead of KIM.
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.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only KIM
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.10%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only KRC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.65%)
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, MACD Bullish Crossover.
KIM 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 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.22%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.12%, 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.
- 1KIM closes the Value gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to KRC's edge.
- 2KIM's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3KRC'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
KIM leads on balance| Metric | KIM | KRC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -1.3% | 0.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 4.3% | 206.3% |
| Gross margin | 54.8% | 48.7% |
| Operating margin | 35.8% | 25.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 5.8% | 3.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.85 | 0.89 |
Performance
KIM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | KIM | KRC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.4% | -0.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2% | 0.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -12% | -9.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -2.9% | 9.4% |
| Year to date | 13.5% | -6.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 6.4% | -13.9% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | KIM | KRC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 66.8 | 60.8 |
| ADX (14) | 28.6 | 22.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.8% | -2.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1.7% | 0.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13.8% | 29.6% |
Risk
KIM is the more resilient| Metric | KIM | KRC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.06 | 0.65 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.16 | -0.51 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.28 | -0.76 |
| Max drawdown | -17.2% | -36.3% |
| Current drawdown | -12.8% | -19.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.6% | 28.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, KIM or KRC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KRC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 55 against KIM's 53. The edge comes from value. KIM 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 KIM or KRC the better buy right now?
KRC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 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 KRC over KIM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. KIM leads Risk Resilience by 27 points; KRC leads Value by 25 points; KIM leads Quality by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, KIM or KRC?
Analyst price targets imply +16% upside for KIM and +10.4% for KRC, so the Street currently favors KIM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors KRC. 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, KIM or KRC?
KRC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. KRC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 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, KIM or KRC?
KRC 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, KIM or KRC?
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, KIM or KRC?
KIM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. KIM on Risk Resilience, by 27 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 KIM more profitable than KRC?
KIM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 54.8% vs 48.7%; operating margin 35.8% vs 25.1%; ttm roe 5.8% vs 3.2%.
Is KRC's lead over KIM getting stronger or weaker?
KRC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 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 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-30, when KRC moved ahead of KIM.
What would change the KIM vs KRC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: KIM closes the Value gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to KRC's edge; KIM's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; KRC'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 KIM and KRC?
KIM: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. KRC: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 KIM is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On KRC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare KIM and KRC 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.