NEE vs ORA Stock Comparison
Compare NEE and ORA across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between NEE and ORA?
NEE leads the current stock comparison as NextEra Energy, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
NextEra Energy, Inc. vs Ormat Technologies, Inc.
NEE leads
NEE leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors ORA on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support NEE, and its current signal state is conflicted.
NextEra Energy, Inc.
Ormat Technologies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NEE over ORA, 42 versus 29 as of Sep 11, 2026. NEE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. NEE also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ORA. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NEE today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. NEE lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions. NEE leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare NextEra Energy, Inc. and Ormat Technologies, 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 NEE and ORA 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.
- Quality48 vs 28NEE +20
- Risk Resilience56 vs 43NEE +13
- Value38 vs 26NEE +12
- Momentum30 vs 25NEE +5
5 of 6 evidence groups favor NEE. NEE’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
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 +2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
NEE's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NEE and ORA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NEE (NextEra Energy, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
ORA (Ormat Technologies, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 44% against 13.2%.
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
NEENEE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NEENEE on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
NEENEE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
NEENEE on the Momentum factor, by 5 points.
Lower downside
NEENEE on Risk Resilience, by 13 points.
Analyst upside
ORAORA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors NEE, analyst targets favor ORA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | NEE | ORA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +26.8% | +40.6% | ORA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +25.9% | +30% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 6 | 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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NEE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NEE | 42 vs 29 |
| Fundamentals | NEE | revenue growth 8.3% vs -35.9%; EPS growth 43.8% vs -38.9%; TTM ROE 16.8% vs 5%; gross margin 71.8% vs 27.9%; operating margin 29.5% vs 14.9% |
| Valuation | NEE | Value 38 vs 26 |
| Technicals | NEE | Price vs 50-day -4.5% vs -10.4%; vs 200-day -6.1% vs -16.2% |
| Risk Resilience | NEE | Risk Resilience 56 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | ORA | Target upside 26.8% vs 40.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NEE and ORA and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 NEE.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10NEE lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NEE +13
- 42 vs 29
- 7 sessions ago
- NEE +10
- 41 vs 31
- 30 sessions ago
- NEE +12
- 50 vs 38
- 90 sessions ago
- NEE +30
- 57 vs 27
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.81%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.94%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
NEE 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.16%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.82%, 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.
- 1ORA closes the Quality gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to NEE's edge.
- 2ORA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3NEE'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
NEE leads on balance| Metric | NEE | ORA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.3% | -35.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 43.8% | -38.9% |
| Gross margin | 71.8% | 27.9% |
| Operating margin | 29.5% | 14.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16.8% | 5% |
| Debt to equity | 1.93 | 1.31 |
Performance
NEE leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | NEE | ORA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.8% | -7.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.9% | -14.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.1% | -27.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -10.1% | -10.8% |
| Year to date | 2.7% | -11.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 18.2% | 6.7% |
Technicals
NEE has the stronger structure| Metric | NEE | ORA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 35.6 | 33.2 |
| ADX (14) | 22.5 | 21.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.5% | -10.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -6.1% | -16.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13.2% | 44% |
Risk
NEE is the more resilient| Metric | NEE | ORA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.17 | 0.87 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.69 | 0.26 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.03 | 0.38 |
| Max drawdown | -16.4% | -35% |
| Current drawdown | -15.8% | -33.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 21.1% | 36.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -3.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NEE or ORA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NEE is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 42 against ORA's 29. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 NEE or ORA the better buy right now?
NEE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor NEE over ORA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NEE leads Quality by 20 points; NEE leads Risk Resilience by 13 points; NEE leads Value by 12 points. NEE leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by ORA simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, NEE or ORA?
Analyst price targets imply +26.8% upside for NEE and +40.6% for ORA, so the Street currently favors ORA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors NEE. 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, NEE or ORA?
NEE is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. NEE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 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, NEE or ORA?
NEE 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, NEE or ORA?
NEE on the Momentum factor, by 5 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, NEE or ORA?
NEE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NEE on Risk Resilience, by 13 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 NEE more profitable than ORA?
NEE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 71.8% vs 27.9%; operating margin 29.5% vs 14.9%; ttm roe 16.8% vs 5%.
Is NEE's lead over ORA getting stronger or weaker?
NEE lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the NEE vs ORA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ORA closes the Quality gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to NEE's edge; ORA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; NEE'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 NEE and ORA?
NEE: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. ORA: 1 bullish / 4 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 NEE is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On ORA it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare NEE and ORA 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.