MLM vs URI Stock Comparison
Compare MLM and URI across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between MLM and URI?
MLM leads the current stock comparison as Martin Marietta Materials, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. vs United Rentals, Inc.
MLM leads
MLM leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from URI.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support MLM, and the lead recently changed hands.
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
United Rentals, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MLM over URI, 45 versus 41 as of Sep 6, 2026. MLM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while URI holds the stronger value profile. MLM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MLM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. MLM lead: Reversed — URI led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MLM now leads by 4.
Compare Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. and United Rentals, 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 MLM and URI 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 Resilience15%63 vs 36MLM +27
- Value30%35 vs 54URI +19
- Momentum25%29 vs 15MLM +14
- Quality30%58 vs 51MLM +7
3 of 6 evidence groups favor MLM. MLM’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; URI keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
MLM's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MLM and URI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MLM (Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
URI (United Rentals, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, fundamentals, valuation.
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
MLMMLM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
URIURI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
URIURI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 points.
Momentum
MLMMLM on the Momentum factor, by 14 points.
Lower downside
MLMMLM on Risk Resilience, by 27 points.
Analyst upside
MLMMLM 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 | MLM | URI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +26.6% | +17.5% | MLM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +28.1% | +59.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 13 | 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 MLM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MLM | 45 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | URIon balance | revenue growth 43% vs 10.7%; EPS growth -83.4% vs 41.8%; TTM ROE 23.1% vs 29.2%; gross margin 28.2% vs 37.1%; operating margin 21.1% vs 24.8% — URI takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | URI | Value 35 vs 54 |
| Technicals | URI | Price vs 50-day -6.8% vs -7.2%; vs 200-day -14.3% vs 8.9% |
| Risk Resilience | MLM | Risk Resilience 63 vs 36 |
| Analyst expectations | MLM | Target upside 26.6% vs 17.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MLM and URI 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)
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 MLM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5MLM lead: Reversed — URI led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MLM now leads by 4.
- Today
- MLM +4
- 45 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- MLM +4
- 43 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- URI +7
- 45 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 50 vs 50
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Aug 24 when MLM moved ahead of URI.
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.
0 bullish / 4 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.77%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.9%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (17.29%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
URI 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 +1.15%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.61%, 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.
- 1URI closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to MLM's edge.
- 2URI's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3MLM starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
URI leads on balance| Metric | MLM | URI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 43% | 10.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -83.4% | 41.8% |
| Gross margin | 28.2% | 37.1% |
| Operating margin | 21.1% | 24.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 23.1% | 29.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.52 | 1.67 |
Performance
URI leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | MLM | URI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.1% | -2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6.2% | -13.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -10.6% | -5.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -15.6% | 24.7% |
| Year to date | -16.9% | 24.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -15.8% | 6.8% |
Technicals
URI has the stronger structure| Metric | MLM | URI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 39.2 | 18.7 |
| ADX (14) | 22.6 | 25.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.8% | -7.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -14.3% | 8.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 25.6% | 30.5% |
Risk
MLM is the more resilient| Metric | MLM | URI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.84 | 0.96 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.65 | 0.22 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.93 | 0.36 |
| Max drawdown | -28.7% | -30.4% |
| Current drawdown | -27.3% | -13.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 28.3% | 43.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.1% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MLM or URI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MLM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 45 against URI's 41. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. URI 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 MLM or URI the better buy right now?
MLM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 MLM over URI?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. MLM leads Risk Resilience by 27 points; URI leads Value by 19 points; MLM leads Momentum by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MLM or URI?
Analyst price targets imply +26.6% upside for MLM and +17.5% for URI, so the Street currently favors MLM. 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, MLM or URI?
URI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. URI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 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, MLM or URI?
URI 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, MLM or URI?
MLM on the Momentum factor, by 14 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, MLM or URI?
MLM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MLM on Risk Resilience, by 27 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is MLM more profitable than URI?
URI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 28.2% vs 37.1%; operating margin 21.1% vs 24.8%; ttm roe 23.1% vs 29.2%.
Is MLM's lead over URI getting stronger or weaker?
MLM lead: Reversed — URI led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MLM now leads by 4. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-24, when MLM moved ahead of URI.
What would change the MLM vs URI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: URI closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to MLM's edge; URI's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; MLM starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about MLM and URI?
MLM: 0 bullish / 4 bearish. URI: 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 MLM is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On URI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MLM and URI with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.