MO vs OTLY Stock Comparison
MO currently leads OTLY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 55 vs 42. The clearest difference is momentum, while OTLY has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between MO and OTLY?
MO leads the current stock comparison as Altria Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Altria Group, Inc. vs Oatly Group AB
MO leads
MO leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors OTLY on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support MO, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Altria Group, Inc.
Oatly Group AB
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MO over OTLY, 55 versus 42 as of Oct 31, 2026. MO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while OTLY holds the stronger value profile. MO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors OTLY. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MO today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. MO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Altria Group, Inc. and Oatly Group AB 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 MO and OTLY 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.
- Momentum67 vs 30MO +37
- Risk Resilience42 vs 12MO +30
- Value47 vs 63OTLY +16
- Quality60 vs 45MO +15
4 of 6 evidence groups favor MO. MO’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; OTLY keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -8
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -35
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.1%)
MO's lead widened by 7 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MO and OTLY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MO (Altria Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
OTLY (Oatly Group AB): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 106.8% against 22.3%.
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
MOMO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MOMO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
OTLYOTLY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 points.
Momentum
MOMO on the Momentum factor, by 37 points.
Lower downside
MOMO on Risk Resilience, by 30 points.
Analyst upside
OTLYOTLY on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors MO, analyst targets favor OTLY. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | MO | OTLY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -16.2% | +61.3% | OTLY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.1% | +8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 1 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MO | 55 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | MOon balance | revenue growth 12.6% vs 5.2%; EPS growth 5.4% vs -150%; TTM ROE -265.2% vs -31.3%; gross margin 71% vs 33%; operating margin 55.9% vs -6% — MO takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | OTLY | Value 47 vs 63 |
| Technicals | MO | Price vs 50-day 11.4% vs -37.7%; vs 200-day 6.2% vs -24.6% |
| Risk Resilience | MO | Risk Resilience 42 vs 12 |
| Analyst expectations | OTLY | Target upside -16.2% vs 61.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MO and OTLY and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (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 MO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28MO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MO +13
- 55 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- MO +7
- 58 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- MO +12
- 54 vs 42
- 90 sessions ago
- OTLY +2
- 51 vs 53
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 19 when MO moved ahead of OTLY.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only MO
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only OTLY
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.27%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.1%)
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
MO 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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.67%, AIQ -2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -3.12%, AIQ -9 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.
- 1OTLY closes the Momentum gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to MO's edge.
- 2OTLY's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3MO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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
MO leads on balance| Metric | MO | OTLY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 12.6% | 5.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 5.4% | -150% |
| Gross margin | 71% | 33% |
| Operating margin | 55.9% | -6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -265.2% | -31.3% |
| Debt to equity | -9.21 | -22.44 |
Performance
MO leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | MO | OTLY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.1% | -17.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 8.4% | -21.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 7.4% | -37.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7% | -28.8% |
| Year to date | 26.6% | -19.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 12.9% | -41.2% |
Technicals
MO has the stronger structure| Metric | MO | OTLY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 56.7 | 36.5 |
| ADX (14) | 22 | 32.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 11.4% | -37.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.2% | -24.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.3% | 106.8% |
Risk
MO is the more resilient| Metric | MO | OTLY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.52 | 1.06 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.53 | -0.62 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.65 | -0.81 |
| Max drawdown | -14.6% | -49.1% |
| Current drawdown | -4% | -46.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.5% | 66.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.3% | -5.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MO or OTLY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 55 against OTLY's 42. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. OTLY 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 MO or OTLY the better buy right now?
MO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MO over OTLY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MO leads Momentum by 37 points; MO leads Risk Resilience by 30 points; OTLY leads Value by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MO or OTLY?
Analyst price targets imply -16.2% upside for MO and +61.3% for OTLY, so the Street currently favors OTLY. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MO. 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, MO or OTLY?
OTLY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. OTLY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 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, MO or OTLY?
MO 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, MO or OTLY?
MO on the Momentum factor, by 37 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, MO or OTLY?
MO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MO on Risk Resilience, by 30 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 MO more profitable than OTLY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 71% vs 33%; operating margin 55.9% vs -6%; ttm roe -265.2% vs -31.3%. MO leads on two measures and OTLY on one measure, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is MO's lead over OTLY getting stronger or weaker?
MO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-19, when MO moved ahead of OTLY.
What would change the MO vs OTLY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: OTLY closes the Momentum gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to MO's edge; OTLY's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; MO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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 MO and OTLY?
MO: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. OTLY: 2 bullish / 3 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 MO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On OTLY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MO and OTLY 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.