LEN vs PHM Stock Comparison
PHM currently leads LEN in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 53 vs 48. The clearest difference is quality, while LEN has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between LEN and PHM?
PHM leads the current stock comparison as PulteGroup, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Lennar Corporation vs PulteGroup, Inc.
PHM leads
PHM leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support PHM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Lennar Corporation
PulteGroup, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PHM over LEN, 53 versus 48 as of Oct 21, 2026. PHM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while LEN holds the stronger value profile. PHM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PHM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. PHM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Lennar Corporation and PulteGroup, 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 LEN and PHM 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.
- Quality37 vs 53PHM +16
- Risk Resilience55 vs 70PHM +15
- Value63 vs 56LEN +7
- Momentum38 vs 40Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor PHM. PHM’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; LEN keeps a meaningful value 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 +8
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +11
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
PHM's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LEN and PHM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PHM (PulteGroup, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
LEN (Lennar Corporation): the counter-case, on value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 43.7% against 29.5%.
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
PHMPHM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
LENLEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
PHMPHM on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
PHMPHM 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 | LEN | PHM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +0.2% | +23.2% | PHM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +57.8% | +40.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Sell | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | LEN | PHM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 27.01% | 12.97% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.605 | $0.500 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.000 | $0.920 |
| Years increased | 4 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #52 |
LEN grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 27.01% a year against PHM's 12.97%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window. They are ranked in different cohorts — variable-dividend payers and US dividend-paying corporations — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PHM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PHM | 48 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | PHMon balance | revenue growth 19.9% vs 16.9%; EPS growth 30.9% vs 35.9%; TTM ROE 7.4% vs 14.7%; gross margin 8% vs 24.5%; operating margin 6% vs 14.6% — PHM takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LEN | Value 63 vs 56 |
| Technicals | PHM | Price vs 50-day -4.6% vs -6.4%; vs 200-day -14.9% vs -7.8% |
| Risk Resilience | PHM | Risk Resilience 55 vs 70 |
| Analyst expectations | PHM | Target upside 0.2% vs 23.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LEN and PHM 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 PHM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20PHM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PHM +5
- 48 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- PHM +4
- 46 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- PHM +3
- 51 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- PHM +6
- 50 vs 56
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only LEN
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.88%)
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
PHM 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.21%, AIQ +3 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.43%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1LEN closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to PHM's edge.
- 2LEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3PHM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
PHM leads on balance| Metric | LEN | PHM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 19.9% | 16.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 30.9% | 35.9% |
| Gross margin | 8% | 24.5% |
| Operating margin | 6% | 14.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.4% | 14.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.29 | 0.18 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | LEN | PHM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5% | 2.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.3% | -6.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.3% | -9.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -17% | -11% |
| Year to date | -23.5% | -2.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -36% | -7.5% |
Technicals
PHM has the stronger structure| Metric | LEN | PHM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44.6 | 47 |
| ADX (14) | 18 | 18.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.6% | -6.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -14.9% | -7.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 43.7% | 29.5% |
Risk
PHM is the more resilient| Metric | LEN | PHM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.04 | 0.95 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.14 | -0.21 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.93 | -0.41 |
| Max drawdown | -44.8% | -23.3% |
| Current drawdown | -40.9% | -19.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 38.4% | 32.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LEN or PHM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PHM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 53 against LEN's 48. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. LEN 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 LEN or PHM the better buy right now?
PHM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 5 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 PHM over LEN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PHM leads Quality by 16 points; PHM leads Risk Resilience by 15 points; LEN leads Value by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LEN or PHM?
Analyst price targets imply +0.2% upside for LEN and +23.2% for PHM, so the Street currently favors PHM. 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, LEN or PHM?
LEN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LEN 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, LEN or PHM?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, LEN or PHM?
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, LEN or PHM?
PHM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PHM on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 LEN more profitable than PHM?
PHM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 8% vs 24.5%; operating margin 6% vs 14.6%; ttm roe 7.4% vs 14.7%.
Is PHM's lead over LEN getting stronger or weaker?
PHM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the LEN vs PHM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LEN closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to PHM's edge; LEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; PHM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 LEN and PHM?
LEN: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. PHM: 1 bullish / 2 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 LEN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On PHM it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare LEN and PHM 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.