MHO vs NVR Stock Comparison
NVR currently leads MHO in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 51 vs 48. The clearest difference is quality, while MHO has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between MHO and NVR?
NVR leads the current stock comparison as NVR, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
M/I Homes, Inc. vs NVR, Inc.
NVR leads
NVR leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 6 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors MHO on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support NVR, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
M/I Homes, Inc.
NVR, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NVR over MHO, 51 versus 48 as of Oct 21, 2026. NVR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while MHO holds the stronger value profile. NVR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors MHO. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NVR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. NVR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare M/I Homes, Inc. and NVR, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare MHO and NVR 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.
- Value66 vs 32MHO +34
- Quality45 vs 66NVR +21
- Momentum23 vs 42NVR +19
- Risk Resilience62 vs 73NVR +11
3 of 6 evidence groups favor NVR. NVR’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; MHO 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.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +31
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
The lead changed hands: NVR moved ahead of MHO in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MHO and NVR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NVR (NVR, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
MHO (M/I Homes, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, 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
NVRNVR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NVRNVR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MHOMHO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 points.
Momentum
NVRNVR on the Momentum factor, by 19 points.
Lower downside
NVRNVR on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
MHOMHO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors NVR, analyst targets favor MHO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | MHO | NVR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +47.8% | +14.5% | MHO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +4.2% | +35.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 3 | 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 NVR. 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 | 48 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | NVR | revenue growth 15.5% vs 23.7%; EPS growth 18% vs 22.6%; TTM ROE 10% vs 31%; gross margin 21.5% vs 22.2%; operating margin 9.4% vs 14.9% |
| Valuation | MHO | Value 66 vs 32 |
| Technicals | NVR | Price vs 50-day -18.9% vs -4.6%; vs 200-day -10.1% vs -9.4% |
| Risk Resilience | NVR | Risk Resilience 62 vs 73 |
| Analyst expectations | MHO | Target upside 47.8% vs 14.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MHO and NVR 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 3 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)
- 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 NVR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20NVR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NVR +3
- 48 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- MHO +5
- 48 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- NVR +6
- 50 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- MHO +5
- 58 vs 53
The lead changed hands 13 times in this window, most recently on Oct 20 when NVR moved ahead of MHO.
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 / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only MHO
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.90%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only NVR
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.75%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
NVR 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 -8.08%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 8 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.3%, AIQ +8 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.
- 1MHO closes the Quality gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to NVR's edge.
- 2MHO's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3NVR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate NVR'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
NVR leads on balance| Metric | MHO | NVR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 15.5% | 23.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 18% | 22.6% |
| Gross margin | 21.5% | 22.2% |
| Operating margin | 9.4% | 14.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10% | 31% |
| Debt to equity | 0.31 | 0.31 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | MHO | NVR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.5% | 3.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13% | -5.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -16.7% | -5.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -3.7% | -13.8% |
| Year to date | -3% | -18% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -8.2% | -21.4% |
Technicals
NVR has the stronger structure| Metric | MHO | NVR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 27.7 | 43.1 |
| ADX (14) | 30.2 | 13.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -18.9% | -4.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -10.1% | -9.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 23.4% | 25.5% |
Risk
NVR is the more resilient| Metric | MHO | NVR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.87 | 0.53 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.28 | -0.9 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.5 | -1.46 |
| Max drawdown | -25.1% | -31.3% |
| Current drawdown | -23.9% | -26.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.4% | 27.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.4% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MHO or NVR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NVR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 51 against MHO's 48. The edge comes from quality and momentum. MHO 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 MHO or NVR the better buy right now?
NVR 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 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor NVR over MHO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MHO leads Value by 34 points; NVR leads Quality by 21 points; NVR leads Momentum by 19 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MHO or NVR?
Analyst price targets imply +47.8% upside for MHO and +14.5% for NVR, so the Street currently favors MHO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors NVR. 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, MHO or NVR?
MHO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MHO 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, MHO or NVR?
NVR 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, MHO or NVR?
NVR on the Momentum factor, by 19 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, MHO or NVR?
NVR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NVR 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 MHO more profitable than NVR?
NVR leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 21.5% vs 22.2%; operating margin 9.4% vs 14.9%; ttm roe 10% vs 31%.
Is NVR's lead over MHO getting stronger or weaker?
NVR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 13 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-20, when NVR moved ahead of MHO.
What would change the MHO vs NVR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MHO closes the Quality gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to NVR's edge; MHO's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; NVR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate NVR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about MHO and NVR?
MHO: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. NVR: 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 MHO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NVR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare MHO and NVR 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.