KRC vs PDM Stock Comparison
Kilroy Realty Corporation vs Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc.
KRC leads
KRC leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 0 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors PDM on target upside.
Competitive: 2 of 6 evidence groups support KRC, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Kilroy Realty Corporation
Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KRC over PDM, 55 versus 52 as of Sep 4, 2026. KRC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while PDM holds the stronger momentum profile. KRC also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors PDM. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KRC today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. KRC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Kilroy Realty Corporation and Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare KRC and PDM 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%42 vs 20KRC +22
- Momentum25%56 vs 68PDM +12
- Risk Resilience15%57 vs 50KRC +7
- Value30%67 vs 73PDM +6
2 of 6 evidence groups favor KRC. KRC’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; PDM keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum +13
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No new signals fired.
KRC's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — KRC and PDM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KRC (Kilroy Realty Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
PDM (Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, value, valuation.
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 at 30% each.
Growth
KRCKRC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PDMPDM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
PDMPDM on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
KRCKRC on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
PDMPDM 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 PDM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | KRC | PDM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +0.2% | +6.7% | PDM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +34.9% | +9.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 2 | 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
2 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 | 55 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | KRC | revenue growth 0.9% vs 0.6%; EPS growth 206.3% vs 11.3%; TTM ROE 3.2% vs -5.4%; gross margin 48.7% vs 28.6%; operating margin 25.1% vs 23.3% |
| Valuation | PDM | Value 67 vs 73 |
| Technicals | PDM | Price vs 50-day -2.3% vs 0.9%; vs 200-day 4% vs 14.8% |
| Risk Resilience | KRC | Risk Resilience 57 vs 50 |
| Analyst expectations | PDM | Target upside 0.2% vs 6.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of KRC and PDM 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 · Apr 22 – Sep 3KRC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- KRC +3
- 55 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- PDM +1
- 51 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 49 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- KRC +5
- 54 vs 49
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 31 when KRC moved ahead of PDM.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.99%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.65%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
PDM 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 +0.49%, AIQ +3 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.1%, 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.
- 1PDM closes the Quality gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to KRC's edge.
- 2PDM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3KRC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
KRC leads on balance| Metric | KRC | PDM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.9% | 0.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 206.3% | 11.3% |
| Gross margin | 48.7% | 28.6% |
| Operating margin | 25.1% | 23.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 3.2% | -5.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.89 | 1.54 |
Technicals
PDM has the stronger structure| Metric | KRC | PDM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 58.8 | 57.4 |
| ADX (14) | 26.4 | 11.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.3% | 0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4% | 14.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20% | 21.3% |
Risk
KRC is the more resilient| Metric | KRC | PDM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.61 | 0.65 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.43 | 0.43 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.65 | 0.61 |
| Max drawdown | -37.6% | -29.5% |
| Current drawdown | -16.8% | -2.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.9% | 31.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.7% | -3.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, KRC or PDM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KRC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 4, 2026, scoring 55 against PDM's 52. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. PDM is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 KRC or PDM the better buy right now?
KRC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 4, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 2 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 KRC over PDM?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. KRC leads Quality by 22 points; PDM leads Momentum by 12 points; KRC leads Risk Resilience by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, KRC or PDM?
Analyst price targets imply +0.2% upside for KRC and +6.7% for PDM, so the Street currently favors PDM. 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, KRC or PDM?
PDM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PDM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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, KRC or PDM?
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, KRC or PDM?
PDM on the Momentum factor, by 12 points. 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, KRC or PDM?
KRC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. KRC on Risk Resilience, by 7 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is KRC more profitable than PDM?
KRC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 48.7% vs 28.6%; operating margin 25.1% vs 23.3%; ttm roe 3.2% vs -5.4%.
Is KRC's lead over PDM getting stronger or weaker?
KRC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-31, when KRC moved ahead of PDM.
What would change the KRC vs PDM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PDM closes the Quality gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to KRC's edge; PDM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; KRC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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.
What do the current signals say about KRC and PDM?
KRC: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. PDM: 3 bullish / 1 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 KRC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PDM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare KRC and PDM 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.