LNC vs SPY Stock Comparison
LNC currently leads SPY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 66 vs 65. The clearest difference is value, while SPY has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between LNC and SPY?
LNC leads the current stock comparison as Lincoln National Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Lincoln National Corporation vs State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
LNC leads
LNC leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Value, having only recently taken the lead back from SPY.
Fragile: 1 of 4 evidence groups support LNC, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Lincoln National Corporation
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LNC over SPY, 66 versus 65 as of Oct 31, 2026. LNC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while SPY holds the stronger quality profile. LNC also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 4 covered evidence groups favor LNC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. LNC lead: Reversed — SPY led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LNC now leads by 1.
Compare Lincoln National Corporation and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF 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 LNC and SPY 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.
- Value73 vs 41LNC +32
- Quality69 vs 83SPY +14
- Momentum47 vs 59SPY +12
- Risk Resilience76 vs 87SPY +11
1 of 4 evidence groups favor LNC. LNC’s edge is concentrated in value; SPY keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Quality -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
LNC's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LNC and SPY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LNC (Lincoln National Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
SPY (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF): the counter-case, on quality, momentum, risk resilience.
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
LNCLNC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
LNCLNC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 32 points.
Momentum
SPYSPY on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
SPYSPY on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | LNC | SPY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13.9% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | +38.5% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 4 covered evidence groups favor LNC. 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 | 66 vs 65 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | LNC | Value 73 vs 41 |
| Technicals | SPY | Price vs 50-day -1.8% vs -1.6%; vs 200-day 4.3% vs 6.1% |
| Risk Resilience | SPY | Risk Resilience 76 vs 87 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LNC and SPY 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 4 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 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 LNC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30LNC lead: Reversed — SPY led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LNC now leads by 1.
- Today
- LNC +1
- 66 vs 65
- 7 sessions ago
- LNC +6
- 65 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +4
- 64 vs 68
- 90 sessions ago
- LNC +2
- 66 vs 64
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Oct 20 when SPY moved ahead of LNC.
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
Only LNC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SPY
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.90%)
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.1%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
SPY 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.87%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.77%, 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.
- 1SPY closes the Value gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to LNC's edge.
- 2SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish.
- 3LNC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
Split| Metric | LNC | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -14.4% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 8.6% | — |
| Gross margin | 57.5% | — |
| Operating margin | 14.6% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 22% | — |
| Debt to equity | 0.6 | — |
Performance
SPY leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | LNC | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.7% | -0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1% | 1.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11.6% | 4.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 10% | 8.5% |
| Year to date | -8.7% | 13.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 1.8% | 14% |
Technicals
SPY has the stronger structure| Metric | LNC | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.4 | 48.6 |
| ADX (14) | 13.9 | 14 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.8% | -1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.3% | 6.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 25% | 10% |
Risk
SPY is the more resilient| Metric | LNC | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.02 | 1 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.09 | 0.68 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.13 | 1.04 |
| Max drawdown | -29.9% | -9.1% |
| Current drawdown | -13.5% | -0.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 33.8% | 12.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.5% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LNC or SPY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LNC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 66 against SPY's 65. The edge comes from value. SPY is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 LNC or SPY the better buy right now?
LNC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LNC over SPY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LNC leads Value by 32 points; SPY leads Quality by 14 points; SPY leads Momentum by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LNC or SPY?
Analyst price targets imply +13.9% upside for LNC and not covered for SPY. 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, LNC or SPY?
LNC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LNC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 32 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, LNC or SPY?
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, LNC or SPY?
SPY on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, LNC or SPY?
SPY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPY on Risk Resilience, by 11 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 LNC more profitable than SPY?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is LNC's lead over SPY getting stronger or weaker?
LNC lead: Reversed — SPY led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; LNC now leads by 1. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-20, when SPY moved ahead of LNC.
What would change the LNC vs SPY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SPY closes the Value gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to LNC's edge; SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish; LNC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 LNC and SPY?
LNC: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. SPY: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 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 LNC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SPY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
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.