KR vs MDLZ Stock Comparison
Compare KR and MDLZ across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between KR and MDLZ?
KR leads the current stock comparison as The Kroger Co., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
The Kroger Co. vs Mondelez International, Inc.
KR leads
KR leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Value, having only recently taken the lead back from MDLZ.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support KR, and the lead recently changed hands.
The Kroger Co.
Mondelez International, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KR over MDLZ, 46 versus 45 as of Sep 11, 2026. KR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while MDLZ holds the stronger quality profile. KR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. KR lead: Reversed — MDLZ led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KR now leads by 1.
Compare The Kroger Co. and Mondelez International, Inc. 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 KR and MDLZ 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.
- Value68 vs 37KR +31
- Quality25 vs 45MDLZ +20
- Momentum44 vs 51MDLZ +7
- Risk Resilience47 vs 50Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor KR. KR’s edge is concentrated in value; MDLZ keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
KR's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — KR and MDLZ both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KR (The Kroger Co.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
MDLZ (Mondelez International, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, momentum, fundamentals.
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
KRKR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MDLZMDLZ on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
KRKR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 points.
Momentum
MDLZMDLZ on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
MDLZMDLZ carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
KRKR 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 | KR | MDLZ | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +21.8% | +11.1% | KR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.7% | +13% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 7 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KR. 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 | 46 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | MDLZon balance | revenue growth 32.8% vs -7.2%; EPS growth 6.6% vs 179.1%; TTM ROE 14.7% vs 13.5%; gross margin 23.2% vs 31.1%; operating margin 1.3% vs 11.4% — MDLZ takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | KR | Value 68 vs 37 |
| Technicals | MDLZ | Price vs 50-day 1.3% vs 1.2%; vs 200-day -10.9% vs 5.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 47 vs 50 |
| Analyst expectations | KR | Target upside 21.8% vs 11.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of KR and MDLZ 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 KR.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10KR lead: Reversed — MDLZ led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KR now leads by 1.
- Today
- KR +1
- 46 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- KR +10
- 53 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- MDLZ +5
- 43 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- MDLZ +1
- 41 vs 42
The lead changed hands 11 times in this window, most recently on Sep 1 when KR moved ahead of MDLZ.
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.
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (10.70%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.20%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
MDLZ 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 +2.7%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.05%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1MDLZ closes the Value gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to KR's edge.
- 2MDLZ's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3KR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
MDLZ leads on balance| Metric | KR | MDLZ |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 32.8% | -7.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 6.6% | 179.1% |
| Gross margin | 23.2% | 31.1% |
| Operating margin | 1.3% | 11.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 14.7% | 13.5% |
| Debt to equity | 3.63 | 0.83 |
Performance
MDLZ leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | KR | MDLZ |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.2% | 0% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.6% | 0.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11.7% | -2.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -21.1% | 12.8% |
| Year to date | -8.9% | 16.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -16.2% | 0.9% |
Technicals
MDLZ has the stronger structure| Metric | KR | MDLZ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.2 | 37.9 |
| ADX (14) | 9.6 | 9.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.3% | 1.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -10.9% | 5.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.5% | 20.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | KR | MDLZ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.62 | -0.25 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.61 | -0.06 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.92 | -0.09 |
| Max drawdown | -26.6% | -20% |
| Current drawdown | -24.7% | -3.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 28.2% | 23.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.7% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, KR or MDLZ?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 46 against MDLZ's 45. The edge comes from value. MDLZ is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 KR or MDLZ the better buy right now?
KR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor KR over MDLZ?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. KR leads Value by 31 points; MDLZ leads Quality by 20 points; MDLZ leads Momentum by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, KR or MDLZ?
Analyst price targets imply +21.8% upside for KR and +11.1% for MDLZ, so the Street currently favors KR. 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, KR or MDLZ?
KR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. KR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 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, KR or MDLZ?
MDLZ 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, KR or MDLZ?
MDLZ on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, KR or MDLZ?
MDLZ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MDLZ carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is KR more profitable than MDLZ?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 23.2% vs 31.1%; operating margin 1.3% vs 11.4%; ttm roe 14.7% vs 13.5%. KR leads on one measure and MDLZ on two measures, 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 KR's lead over MDLZ getting stronger or weaker?
KR lead: Reversed — MDLZ led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KR now leads by 1. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 11 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-01, when KR moved ahead of MDLZ.
What would change the KR vs MDLZ verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MDLZ closes the Value gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to KR's edge; MDLZ's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; KR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 KR and MDLZ?
KR: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. MDLZ: 2 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 KR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On MDLZ it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare KR and MDLZ 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.