LLY vs NVO Stock Comparison
NVO currently leads LLY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 66 vs 62. The clearest difference is value, while LLY has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between LLY and NVO?
NVO leads the current stock comparison as Novo Nordisk A/S, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Eli Lilly and Company vs Novo Nordisk A/S
NVO leads
NVO leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from LLY.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support NVO, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Eli Lilly and Company
Novo Nordisk A/S
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NVO over LLY, 66 versus 62 as of Oct 21, 2026. NVO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while LLY holds the stronger momentum profile. NVO also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NVO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. NVO lead: Reversed — LLY led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NVO now leads by 4.
Compare Eli Lilly and Company and Novo Nordisk A/S 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 LLY and NVO 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.
- Momentum95 vs 54LLY +41
- Value26 vs 60NVO +34
- Quality76 vs 91NVO +15
- Risk Resilience50 vs 51Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor NVO. NVO’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; LLY keeps a meaningful momentum 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 +7
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +10
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
NVO's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LLY and NVO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NVO (Novo Nordisk A/S): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
LLY (Eli Lilly and Company): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 29.4% against 22.8%.
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
NVONVO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
LLYLLY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
NVONVO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 points.
Momentum
LLYLLY on the Momentum factor, by 41 points.
Lower downside
NVONVO carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
NVONVO 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 | LLY | NVO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +4.5% | +11.4% | NVO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +42.2% | +16.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 3 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | LLY | NVO |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 15.18% | 21.57% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.960 | $0.650 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $6.000 | $1.727 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #34 | #12 |
NVO grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 21.57% a year against LLY's 15.18%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NVO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NVO | 62 vs 66 |
| Fundamentals | LLY | revenue growth 16% vs -18.9%; EPS growth -3.9% vs -56.6%; TTM ROE 92.6% vs 59.1%; gross margin 84% vs 80.6%; operating margin 43.9% vs 43.1% |
| Valuation | NVO | Value 26 vs 60 |
| Technicals | LLY | Price vs 50-day 7.5% vs -7.8%; vs 200-day 18.7% vs -12.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 50 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | NVO | Target upside 4.5% vs 11.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LLY and NVO 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 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)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (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 NVO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20NVO lead: Reversed — LLY led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NVO now leads by 4.
- Today
- NVO +4
- 62 vs 66
- 7 sessions ago
- NVO +3
- 61 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- LLY +6
- 63 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- NVO +6
- 51 vs 57
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Sep 24 when LLY moved ahead of NVO.
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.
6 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only LLY
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (9.31%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only NVO
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.08%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
NVO 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 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.01%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.74%, 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.
- 1LLY closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to NVO's edge.
- 2LLY's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3NVO'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
LLY leads on balance| Metric | LLY | NVO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 16% | -18.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -3.9% | -56.6% |
| Gross margin | 84% | 80.6% |
| Operating margin | 43.9% | 43.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 92.6% | 59.1% |
| Debt to equity | 1.62 | 0.63 |
Performance
LLY leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | LLY | NVO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 10% | 3.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 9.7% | -0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 10.4% | -18.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 42.2% | -0.2% |
| Year to date | 19.4% | -22.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 56.7% | -29.8% |
Technicals
LLY has the stronger structure| Metric | LLY | NVO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 74.4 | 62.9 |
| ADX (14) | 25.2 | 26.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7.5% | -7.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 18.7% | -12.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 29.4% | 22.8% |
Risk
Split| Metric | LLY | NVO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.25 | 1.03 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.41 | -0.56 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.62 | -0.71 |
| Max drawdown | -23.3% | -44.8% |
| Current drawdown | 0% | -38.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.9% | 45.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LLY or NVO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NVO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 66 against LLY's 62. The edge comes from value and quality. LLY 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 LLY or NVO the better buy right now?
NVO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor NVO over LLY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LLY leads Momentum by 41 points; NVO leads Value by 34 points; NVO leads Quality by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LLY or NVO?
Analyst price targets imply +4.5% upside for LLY and +11.4% for NVO, so the Street currently favors NVO. 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, LLY or NVO?
NVO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. NVO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 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, LLY or NVO?
LLY 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, LLY or NVO?
LLY on the Momentum factor, by 41 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, LLY or NVO?
NVO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NVO 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 LLY more profitable than NVO?
LLY leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 84% vs 80.6%; operating margin 43.9% vs 43.1%; ttm roe 92.6% vs 59.1%.
Is NVO's lead over LLY getting stronger or weaker?
NVO lead: Reversed — LLY led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NVO now leads by 4. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-24, when LLY moved ahead of NVO.
What would change the LLY vs NVO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LLY closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to NVO's edge; LLY's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; NVO'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 LLY and NVO?
LLY: 6 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. NVO: 1 bullish / 2 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 LLY is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NVO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare LLY and NVO 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.