LIN vs RPM Stock Comparison
Compare LIN and RPM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between LIN and RPM?
RPM leads the current stock comparison as RPM International Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Linde plc vs RPM International Inc.
RPM leads
RPM leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Value, but the lead has narrowed from 16 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support RPM, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Linde plc
RPM International Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors RPM over LIN, 50 versus 42 as of Sep 11, 2026. RPM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value. RPM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RPM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. RPM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Linde plc and RPM 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 LIN and RPM 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.
- Value34 vs 61RPM +27
- Quality59 vs 57Even
- Risk Resilience62 vs 64Even
- Momentum21 vs 22Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor RPM. RPM’s edge is concentrated in value.
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 -5
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
RPM's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LIN and RPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
RPM (RPM International Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
LIN (Linde plc): the counter-case, on fundamentals, technicals.
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
RPMRPM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
RPMRPM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
RPMRPM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
LINLIN carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
RPMRPM 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 | LIN | RPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +21.8% | +31.6% | RPM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +15.3% | +25.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 6 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RPM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | RPM | 42 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | LINon balance | revenue growth 5.8% vs 38.8%; EPS growth 4.2% vs 3.2%; TTM ROE 18.9% vs 20.9%; gross margin 45.6% vs 41.4%; operating margin 28.7% vs 12.3% — LIN takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | RPM | Value 34 vs 61 |
| Technicals | LIN | Price vs 50-day -6.5% vs -7.1%; vs 200-day -2.9% vs -6.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 62 vs 64 |
| Analyst expectations | RPM | Target upside 21.8% vs 31.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LIN and RPM 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 moderate at 8 points.
- 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)
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 RPM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10RPM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- RPM +8
- 42 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- RPM +2
- 49 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- RPM +16
- 44 vs 60
- 90 sessions ago
- RPM +2
- 56 vs 58
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Sep 3 when RPM 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.
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
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.26%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
RPM 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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1%, AIQ -2 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.91%, 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.
- 1LIN closes the Value gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to RPM's edge.
- 2LIN's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3RPM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 8 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate RPM'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
LIN leads on balance| Metric | LIN | RPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.8% | 38.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 4.2% | 3.2% |
| Gross margin | 45.6% | 41.4% |
| Operating margin | 28.7% | 12.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 18.9% | 20.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.72 | 0.87 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | LIN | RPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.3% | -3.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.7% | -13.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -9.3% | -4.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -4.1% | -2.2% |
| Year to date | 8.3% | -4.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -1.7% | -21.8% |
Technicals
LIN has the stronger structure| Metric | LIN | RPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 31.5 | 24.6 |
| ADX (14) | 22.7 | 16.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.5% | -7.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.9% | -6.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 14.7% | 23.1% |
Risk
Split| Metric | LIN | RPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.09 | 0.95 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.24 | -0.78 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.36 | -1.54 |
| Max drawdown | -19.5% | -27.3% |
| Current drawdown | -15.6% | -22.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 19.2% | 29.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.9% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LIN or RPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, RPM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 50 against LIN's 42. The edge comes from 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 LIN or RPM the better buy right now?
RPM 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: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor RPM over LIN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. RPM leads Value by 27 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LIN or RPM?
Analyst price targets imply +21.8% upside for LIN and +31.6% for RPM, so the Street currently favors RPM. 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, LIN or RPM?
RPM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. RPM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 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, LIN or RPM?
RPM 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, LIN or RPM?
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, LIN or RPM?
LIN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LIN 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 LIN more profitable than RPM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 45.6% vs 41.4%; operating margin 28.7% vs 12.3%; ttm roe 18.9% vs 20.9%. LIN leads on two measures and RPM on one measure, 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 RPM's lead over LIN getting stronger or weaker?
RPM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 8 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 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-03, when RPM moved ahead of LIN.
What would change the LIN vs RPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LIN closes the Value gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to RPM's edge; LIN's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; RPM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 8 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate RPM's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about LIN and RPM?
LIN: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. RPM: 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 LIN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On RPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare LIN and RPM 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.