NDSN vs PH Stock Comparison
Compare NDSN and PH across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between NDSN and PH?
NDSN leads the current stock comparison as Nordson Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Nordson Corporation vs Parker-Hannifin Corporation
NDSN leads
NDSN leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors PH on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support NDSN, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Nordson Corporation
Parker-Hannifin Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NDSN over PH, 50 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. NDSN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum. NDSN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors PH. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NDSN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. NDSN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Nordson Corporation and Parker-Hannifin Corporation 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 NDSN and PH 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.
- Momentum36 vs 9NDSN +27
- Risk Resilience66 vs 63Even
- Quality64 vs 64Even
- Value40 vs 40Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor NDSN. NDSN’s edge is concentrated in momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -21
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No new signals fired.
NDSN's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NDSN and PH both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NDSN (Nordson Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
PH (Parker-Hannifin Corporation): the counter-case, on 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
NDSNNDSN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NDSNNDSN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
NDSNNDSN on the Momentum factor, by 27 points.
Lower downside
PHPH carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
PHPH on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors NDSN, analyst targets favor PH. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | NDSN | PH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13.2% | +19% | PH has more room |
| Target dispersion | +11.2% | +36.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 9 | 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 NDSN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NDSN | 50 vs 43 |
| Fundamentals | NDSNon balance | revenue growth 10.4% vs 4.9%; EPS growth 30.5% vs 20.9%; TTM ROE 17.6% vs 25.1%; gross margin 55.3% vs 37.7%; operating margin 26.9% vs 21.6% — NDSN takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 40 vs 40 |
| Technicals | NDSN | Price vs 50-day 2.9% vs -4%; vs 200-day 9.6% vs -0.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 66 vs 63 |
| Analyst expectations | PH | Target upside 13.2% vs 19% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NDSN and PH 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 moderate at 7 points.
- 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 NDSN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10NDSN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NDSN +7
- 50 vs 43
- 7 sessions ago
- NDSN +12
- 56 vs 44
- 30 sessions ago
- NDSN +4
- 62 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- PH +6
- 52 vs 58
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Jul 21 when NDSN moved ahead of PH.
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.94%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.52%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
NDSN 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 5 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.28%, AIQ -5 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.7%, AIQ -1 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.
- 1PH closes the Momentum gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to NDSN's edge.
- 2PH's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3NDSN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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
NDSN leads on balance| Metric | NDSN | PH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.4% | 4.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 30.5% | 20.9% |
| Gross margin | 55.3% | 37.7% |
| Operating margin | 26.9% | 21.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.6% | 25.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.55 | 0.57 |
Performance
NDSN leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | NDSN | PH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.9% | -1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.2% | -12.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 10.4% | 6.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 12.3% | -0.7% |
| Year to date | 27.9% | 6.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 36% | 23.6% |
Technicals
NDSN has the stronger structure| Metric | NDSN | PH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 16.9 | 31.2 |
| ADX (14) | 24.4 | 22.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.9% | -4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 9.6% | -0.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 33.5% | 21.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | NDSN | PH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.86 | 0.82 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.41 | 0.79 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.54 | 1.37 |
| Max drawdown | -14.4% | -19.5% |
| Current drawdown | -8.1% | -13% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.1% | 26.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NDSN or PH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NDSN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 50 against PH's 43. The edge comes from momentum. 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 NDSN or PH the better buy right now?
NDSN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor NDSN over PH?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NDSN leads Momentum by 27 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NDSN or PH?
Analyst price targets imply +13.2% upside for NDSN and +19% for PH, so the Street currently favors PH. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors NDSN. 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, NDSN or PH?
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, NDSN or PH?
NDSN 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, NDSN or PH?
NDSN on the Momentum factor, by 27 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, NDSN or PH?
PH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PH carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is NDSN more profitable than PH?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 55.3% vs 37.7%; operating margin 26.9% vs 21.6%; ttm roe 17.6% vs 25.1%. NDSN leads on two measures and PH 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 NDSN's lead over PH getting stronger or weaker?
NDSN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 7 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-21, when NDSN moved ahead of PH.
What would change the NDSN vs PH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PH closes the Momentum gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to NDSN's edge; PH's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; NDSN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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 NDSN and PH?
NDSN: 4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. PH: 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 NDSN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PH it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare NDSN and PH 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.