MLM vs VMC Stock Comparison
MLM currently leads VMC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 55. The clearest difference is quality, while VMC has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between MLM and VMC?
MLM leads the current stock comparison as Martin Marietta Materials, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. vs Vulcan Materials Company
MLM leads
MLM leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support MLM, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
Vulcan Materials Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MLM over VMC, 59 versus 55 as of Oct 22, 2026. MLM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while VMC holds the stronger risk resilience profile. MLM also shows the weaker 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: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. and Vulcan Materials Company 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 MLM and VMC 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.
- Quality58 vs 47MLM +11
- Momentum87 vs 81MLM +6
- Risk Resilience64 vs 68VMC +4
- Value35 vs 35Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor MLM. MLM’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; VMC keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 +18
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +15
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
MLM's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MLM and VMC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MLM (Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
VMC (Vulcan Materials Company): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
MLMMLM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
VMCVMC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
MLMMLM on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
VMCVMC on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 | VMC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +25.4% | +15.7% | MLM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.7% | +32.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 9 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | MLM | VMC |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 7.66% | 7.58% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.240 | $1.360 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $3.240 | $1.960 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #153 | #159 |
MLM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 7.66% a year against VMC's 7.58%. 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 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 | 59 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | MLMon balance | revenue growth 43% vs 22.8%; EPS growth -83.4% vs 95.3%; TTM ROE 23.1% vs 13.1%; gross margin 28.2% vs 27.4%; operating margin 21.1% vs 19.9% — MLM takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 35 vs 35 |
| Technicals | VMC | Price vs 50-day 0.7% vs 2.9%; vs 200-day -12.6% vs -7% |
| Risk Resilience | VMC | Risk Resilience 64 vs 68 |
| Analyst expectations | MLM | Target upside 25.4% vs 15.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MLM and VMC 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 leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 MLM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20MLM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MLM +4
- 59 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- MLM +2
- 50 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- MLM +1
- 44 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- MLM +1
- 43 vs 42
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jul 20 when MLM moved ahead of VMC.
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.
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only VMC
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, BB Upper Band Breach, MACD Bullish Crossover.
MLM 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.28%, AIQ +4 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.04%, AIQ +4 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.
- 1VMC closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to MLM's edge.
- 2VMC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3MLM'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
MLM leads on balance| Metric | MLM | VMC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 43% | 22.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -83.4% | 95.3% |
| Gross margin | 28.2% | 27.4% |
| Operating margin | 21.1% | 19.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 23.1% | 13.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.52 | 0.58 |
Performance
VMC leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | MLM | VMC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 7.4% | 7.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.7% | 5.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.8% | -5.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -17.4% | -9.9% |
| Year to date | -18.5% | -8.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -18.7% | -11.6% |
Technicals
VMC has the stronger structure| Metric | MLM | VMC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 69.8 | 71.4 |
| ADX (14) | 22.1 | 22.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.7% | 2.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12.6% | -7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 24.9% | 23.5% |
Risk
VMC is the more resilient| Metric | MLM | VMC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.85 | 0.82 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.73 | -0.42 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.06 | -0.6 |
| Max drawdown | -33.5% | -27.1% |
| Current drawdown | -28.3% | -20.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 28.4% | 28.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.1% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MLM or VMC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MLM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 59 against VMC's 55. The edge comes from quality and momentum. VMC is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 VMC the better buy right now?
MLM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 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 VMC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MLM leads Quality by 11 points; MLM leads Momentum by 6 points; VMC leads Risk Resilience by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MLM or VMC?
Analyst price targets imply +25.4% upside for MLM and +15.7% for VMC, 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 VMC?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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 VMC?
VMC 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 VMC?
MLM on the Momentum factor, by 6 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, MLM or VMC?
VMC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. VMC on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 MLM more profitable than VMC?
MLM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 28.2% vs 27.4%; operating margin 21.1% vs 19.9%; ttm roe 23.1% vs 13.1%.
Is MLM's lead over VMC getting stronger or weaker?
MLM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 4 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 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-20, when MLM moved ahead of VMC.
What would change the MLM vs VMC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: VMC closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to MLM's edge; VMC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; MLM'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 MLM and VMC?
MLM: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. VMC: 2 bullish / 3 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 MLM is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On VMC it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare MLM and VMC 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.