NGD vs RGLD Stock Comparison
Compare NGD and RGLD across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between NGD and RGLD?
NGD leads the current stock comparison as New Gold Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
New Gold Inc. vs Royal Gold, Inc.
NGD leads
NGD leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from RGLD.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support NGD, and the lead recently changed hands.
New Gold Inc.
Royal Gold, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NGD over RGLD, 61 versus 55 as of Sep 11, 2026. NGD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while RGLD holds the stronger risk resilience profile. NGD also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NGD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. NGD lead: Reversed — RGLD led by 17 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NGD now leads by 6.
Compare New Gold Inc. and Royal Gold, 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 NGD and RGLD 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.
- Quality90 vs 71NGD +19
- Risk Resilience52 vs 60RGLD +8
- Value36 vs 36Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor NGD. NGD’s edge is concentrated in quality; RGLD keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -13
No new signals fired.
NGD's lead widened by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NGD and RGLD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NGD (New Gold Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
RGLD (Royal Gold, Inc.): 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
NGDNGD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NGDNGD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
RGLDRGLD on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
NGDNGD 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 | NGD | RGLD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +40.4% | +21.4% | NGD has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +14.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 4 | 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 NGD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NGD | 61 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | NGDon balance | revenue growth 10.5% vs -4%; EPS growth 3.7% vs -16%; TTM ROE 64.8% vs 11.5%; gross margin 51.8% vs 66.8%; operating margin 44.8% vs 63.1% — NGD takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 36 vs 36 |
| Technicals | RGLD | Price vs 50-day -18.6% vs 12.7%; vs 200-day 28% vs 6.9% |
| Risk Resilience | RGLD | Risk Resilience 52 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | NGD | Target upside 40.4% vs 21.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NGD and RGLD 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 6 points.
- 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)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (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 NGD.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10NGD lead: Reversed — RGLD led by 17 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NGD now leads by 6.
- Today
- NGD +6
- 61 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- NGD +2
- 61 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- RGLD +17
- 47 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- RGLD +1
- 47 vs 48
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when NGD moved ahead of RGLD.
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.
No active signals
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.21%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
RGLD 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.67%, AIQ -3 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.
- 1RGLD closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to NGD's edge.
- 2RGLD's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3NGD starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
NGD leads on balance| Metric | NGD | RGLD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.5% | -4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 3.7% | -16% |
| Gross margin | 51.8% | 66.8% |
| Operating margin | 44.8% | 63.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 64.8% | 11.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.21 | 0.05 |
Performance
RGLD leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | NGD | RGLD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -15.3% | -1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -14.6% | 9.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 10.3% | 28.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 41.2% | -7.9% |
| Year to date | 4.2% | 14.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 170.2% | 36.2% |
Technicals
RGLD has the stronger structure| Metric | NGD | RGLD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 22.1 | 51.4 |
| ADX (14) | 22.6 | 36.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -18.6% | 12.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 28% | 6.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 69.9% | 42% |
Risk
RGLD is the more resilient| Metric | NGD | RGLD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.37 | 1.35 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.88 | 0.88 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.37 | 1.28 |
| Max drawdown | -32.3% | -38.4% |
| Current drawdown | -32.3% | -16.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 66% | 41.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7% | -4.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NGD or RGLD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NGD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 61 against RGLD's 55. The edge comes from quality. RGLD 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 NGD or RGLD the better buy right now?
NGD 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 NGD over RGLD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NGD leads Quality by 19 points; RGLD leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NGD or RGLD?
Analyst price targets imply +40.4% upside for NGD and +21.4% for RGLD, so the Street currently favors NGD. 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, NGD or RGLD?
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, NGD or RGLD?
NGD 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, NGD or RGLD?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, NGD or RGLD?
RGLD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. RGLD on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 NGD more profitable than RGLD?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 51.8% vs 66.8%; operating margin 44.8% vs 63.1%; ttm roe 64.8% vs 11.5%. NGD leads on one measure and RGLD on two measures, 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 NGD's lead over RGLD getting stronger or weaker?
NGD lead: Reversed — RGLD led by 17 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NGD now leads by 6. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-02, when NGD moved ahead of RGLD.
What would change the NGD vs RGLD verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: RGLD closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to NGD's edge; RGLD's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; NGD starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 NGD and RGLD?
NGD: No active signals. RGLD: 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. On RGLD it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare NGD and RGLD 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.