KMI vs WMB Stock Comparison
KMI currently leads WMB in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 51 vs 42. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between KMI and WMB?
KMI leads the current stock comparison as Kinder Morgan, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Kinder Morgan, Inc. vs The Williams Companies, Inc.
KMI leads
KMI leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors WMB on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support KMI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Kinder Morgan, Inc.
The Williams Companies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KMI over WMB, 51 versus 42 as of Oct 21, 2026. KMI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value. KMI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors WMB. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KMI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. KMI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Kinder Morgan, Inc. and The Williams Companies, 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 KMI and WMB 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.
- Momentum79 vs 47KMI +32
- Value31 vs 24KMI +7
- Risk Resilience47 vs 43KMI +4
- Quality51 vs 54Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor KMI. KMI’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
KMI's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — KMI and WMB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KMI (Kinder Morgan, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
WMB (The Williams Companies, Inc.): the counter-case, on fundamentals, 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
KMIKMI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WMBWMB on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
KMIKMI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 points.
Momentum
KMIKMI on the Momentum factor, by 32 points.
Lower downside
KMIKMI on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
WMBWMB on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors KMI, analyst targets favor WMB. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | KMI | WMB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +8.1% | +21.3% | WMB has more room |
| Target dispersion | +27.2% | +31.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 12 | 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 | KMI | WMB |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 2.33% | 4.56% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.039 | $1.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.165 | $2.000 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #320 | #262 |
WMB grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 4.56% a year against KMI's 2.33%. 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KMI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | KMI | 51 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | WMB | EPS growth -11.4% vs -4.2%; TTM ROE 11.1% vs 23.9%; gross margin 54.9% vs 73.6%; operating margin 29% vs 40.3% |
| Valuation | KMI | Value 31 vs 24 |
| Technicals | KMI | Price vs 50-day 6.9% vs 0.8%; vs 200-day 5.5% vs -2.2% |
| Risk Resilience | KMI | Risk Resilience 47 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | WMB | Target upside 8.1% vs 21.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of KMI and WMB 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 moderate at 9 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 KMI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20KMI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- KMI +9
- 51 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- KMI +12
- 52 vs 40
- 30 sessions ago
- KMI +3
- 40 vs 37
- 90 sessions ago
- KMI +1
- 49 vs 48
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Aug 31 when KMI moved ahead of WMB.
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.
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only KMI
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.13%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only WMB
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.47%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze.
KMI 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 +1.19%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +3.51%, AIQ +1 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.
- 1WMB closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to KMI's edge.
- 2WMB's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3KMI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 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
WMB leads on balance| Metric | KMI | WMB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7.3% | 0.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -11.4% | -4.2% |
| Gross margin | 54.9% | 73.6% |
| Operating margin | 29% | 40.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.1% | 23.9% |
| Debt to equity | 1.02 | 2.33 |
Performance
KMI leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | KMI | WMB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.4% | -5.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 7.4% | -0.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 3.3% | -5.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.3% | -0.1% |
| Year to date | 22.1% | 17% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 23.4% | 12.5% |
Technicals
KMI has the stronger structure| Metric | KMI | WMB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 74.6 | 57 |
| ADX (14) | 17.4 | 17.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.9% | 0.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 5.5% | -2.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 25% | 29.5% |
Risk
KMI is the more resilient| Metric | KMI | WMB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.21 | 0 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.87 | 0.44 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.35 | 0.68 |
| Max drawdown | -12.1% | -14.4% |
| Current drawdown | -2.2% | -11.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 21.6% | 25.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, KMI or WMB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KMI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 51 against WMB's 42. The edge comes from momentum and value. 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 KMI or WMB the better buy right now?
KMI 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 KMI over WMB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. KMI leads Momentum by 32 points; KMI leads Value by 7 points; KMI leads Risk Resilience by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, KMI or WMB?
Analyst price targets imply +8.1% upside for KMI and +21.3% for WMB, so the Street currently favors WMB. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors KMI. 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, KMI or WMB?
KMI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. KMI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 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, KMI or WMB?
WMB 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, KMI or WMB?
KMI on the Momentum factor, by 32 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, KMI or WMB?
KMI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. KMI on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 KMI more profitable than WMB?
WMB leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 54.9% vs 73.6%; operating margin 29% vs 40.3%; ttm roe 11.1% vs 23.9%.
Is KMI's lead over WMB getting stronger or weaker?
KMI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 9 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 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-31, when KMI moved ahead of WMB.
What would change the KMI vs WMB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: WMB closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to KMI's edge; WMB's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; KMI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; 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 KMI and WMB?
KMI: 3 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WMB: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, 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 KMI is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On WMB it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare KMI and WMB 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.