AMGN vs LIN Stock Comparison
Compare AMGN and LIN across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AMGN and LIN?
AMGN leads the current stock comparison as Amgen Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Amgen Inc. vs Linde plc
AMGN leads
AMGN leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 19 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors LIN on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support AMGN, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AMGN over LIN, 44 versus 42 as of Sep 11, 2026. AMGN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while LIN holds the stronger risk resilience profile. AMGN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors LIN. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AMGN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. AMGN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Amgen Inc. and Linde plc 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 AMGN and LIN 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 Resilience39 vs 62LIN +23
- Quality70 vs 59AMGN +11
- Value44 vs 34AMGN +10
- Momentum15 vs 21LIN +6
3 of 6 evidence groups favor AMGN. AMGN’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; LIN keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
AMGN's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMGN and LIN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AMGN (Amgen Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
LIN (Linde plc): the counter-case, on risk resilience, momentum, 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
AMGNAMGN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AMGNAMGN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AMGNAMGN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
LINLIN on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
LINLIN on Risk Resilience, by 23 points.
Analyst upside
LINLIN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AMGN, analyst targets favor LIN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AMGN | LIN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -0.2% | +21.8% | LIN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +61.1% | +15.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 18 | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AMGN. 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 | 44 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | AMGN | revenue growth 16.7% vs 5.8%; EPS growth 30.6% vs 4.2%; TTM ROE 89.3% vs 18.9%; gross margin 72.7% vs 45.6%; operating margin 33.2% vs 28.7% |
| Valuation | AMGN | Value 44 vs 34 |
| Technicals | AMGN | Price vs 50-day -5.4% vs -6.5%; vs 200-day 6.5% vs -2.9% |
| Risk Resilience | LIN | Risk Resilience 39 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | LIN | Target upside -0.2% vs 21.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMGN and LIN 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 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 AMGN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10AMGN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AMGN +2
- 44 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- AMGN +9
- 58 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- AMGN +19
- 63 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- AMGN +5
- 61 vs 56
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Jun 22 when AMGN moved ahead of LIN.
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.
4 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.03%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.57%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
AMGN 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 -1.34%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1%, AIQ -2 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.
- 1LIN closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMGN's edge.
- 2LIN's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3AMGN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 17 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate AMGN's advantage entirely.
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
AMGN leads on balance| Metric | AMGN | LIN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 16.7% | 5.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 30.6% | 4.2% |
| Gross margin | 72.7% | 45.6% |
| Operating margin | 33.2% | 28.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 89.3% | 18.9% |
| Debt to equity | 4.9 | 0.72 |
Performance
AMGN leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | AMGN | LIN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -8.5% | -5.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.1% | -3.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 13.2% | -9.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 1.3% | -4.1% |
| Year to date | 16.9% | 8.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 36.5% | -1.7% |
Technicals
AMGN has the stronger structure| Metric | AMGN | LIN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 24.4 | 31.5 |
| ADX (14) | 40 | 22.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.4% | -6.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.5% | -2.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 40.9% | 14.7% |
Risk
LIN is the more resilient| Metric | AMGN | LIN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.54 | 0.09 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.07 | -0.24 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.64 | -0.36 |
| Max drawdown | -16.6% | -19.5% |
| Current drawdown | -13.9% | -15.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 29.6% | 19.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -1.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AMGN or LIN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AMGN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 44 against LIN's 42. The edge comes from quality and value. LIN 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 AMGN or LIN the better buy right now?
AMGN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 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 AMGN over LIN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LIN leads Risk Resilience by 23 points; AMGN leads Quality by 11 points; AMGN leads Value by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AMGN or LIN?
Analyst price targets imply -0.2% upside for AMGN and +21.8% for LIN, so the Street currently favors LIN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AMGN. 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, AMGN or LIN?
AMGN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AMGN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, AMGN or LIN?
AMGN 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, AMGN or LIN?
LIN on the Momentum factor, by 6 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, AMGN or LIN?
LIN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LIN on Risk Resilience, by 23 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 AMGN more profitable than LIN?
AMGN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 72.7% vs 45.6%; operating margin 33.2% vs 28.7%; ttm roe 89.3% vs 18.9%.
Is AMGN's lead over LIN getting stronger or weaker?
AMGN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-22, when AMGN moved ahead of LIN.
What would change the AMGN vs LIN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LIN closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMGN's edge; LIN's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; AMGN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 17 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate AMGN's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AMGN and LIN?
AMGN: 4 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. LIN: 2 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 AMGN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On LIN it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AMGN and LIN 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.