NTRA vs RVTY Stock Comparison
Natera, Inc. vs Revvity, Inc.
RVTY leads
RVTY leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from NTRA. Wall Street currently favors NTRA on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support RVTY, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Natera, Inc.
Revvity, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors RVTY over NTRA, 57 versus 52 as of Sep 5, 2026. RVTY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while NTRA holds the stronger quality profile. RVTY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors NTRA. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RVTY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. RVTY lead: Reversed — NTRA led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RVTY now leads by 5.
Compare Natera, Inc. and Revvity, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare NTRA and RVTY 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.
- Momentum25%63 vs 81RVTY +18
- Value30%34 vs 42RVTY +8
- Quality30%57 vs 50NTRA +7
- Risk Resilience15%63 vs 64Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor RVTY. RVTY’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; NTRA keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +9
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
RVTY's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NTRA and RVTY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
RVTY (Revvity, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
NTRA (Natera, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, technicals, 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
RVTYRVTY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
RVTYRVTY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
RVTYRVTY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
RVTYRVTY on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
NTRANTRA carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
NTRANTRA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors RVTY, analyst targets favor NTRA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | NTRA | RVTY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -7.6% | -13.4% | NTRA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +51.1% | +26.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 14 | 5 | 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 RVTY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | RVTY | 52 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | RVTYon balance | revenue growth 8.1% vs 2.6%; EPS growth 21.7% vs 30.6%; TTM ROE -11.7% vs 3.3%; gross margin 65.3% vs 52.1%; operating margin -10.7% vs 12.3% — RVTY takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | RVTY | Value 34 vs 42 |
| Technicals | NTRA | Price vs 50-day 12.3% vs 11.9%; vs 200-day 39.3% vs 27.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 63 vs 64 |
| Analyst expectations | NTRA | Target upside -7.6% vs -13.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NTRA and RVTY 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 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 RVTY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4RVTY lead: Reversed — NTRA led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RVTY now leads by 5.
- Today
- RVTY +5
- 52 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- RVTY +5
- 53 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- NTRA +2
- 58 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- NTRA +2
- 59 vs 57
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 7 when NTRA moved ahead of RVTY.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (24.03%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.71%)
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
RVTY 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.16%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.31%, 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.
- 1NTRA closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to RVTY's edge.
- 2NTRA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3RVTY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
RVTY leads on balance| Metric | NTRA | RVTY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.1% | 2.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 21.7% | 30.6% |
| Gross margin | 65.3% | 52.1% |
| Operating margin | -10.7% | 12.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -11.7% | 3.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.13 | 0.46 |
Performance
NTRA leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | NTRA | RVTY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.6% | 1.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.9% | 13.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 52.4% | 32.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 65.6% | 34.7% |
| Year to date | 43.3% | 34% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 95.9% | 51.9% |
Technicals
NTRA has the stronger structure| Metric | NTRA | RVTY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.9 | 73.4 |
| ADX (14) | 38.2 | 29.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 12.3% | 11.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 39.3% | 27.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.5% | 30.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | NTRA | RVTY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.27 | 1.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.57 | 1.2 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.53 | 1.95 |
| Max drawdown | -28.2% | -30.1% |
| Current drawdown | -3.1% | -0.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 48.3% | 37.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | -3.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NTRA or RVTY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, RVTY is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 57 against NTRA's 52. The edge comes from momentum and value. NTRA is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 NTRA or RVTY the better buy right now?
RVTY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 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 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor RVTY over NTRA?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. RVTY leads Momentum by 18 points; RVTY leads Value by 8 points; NTRA leads Quality by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NTRA or RVTY?
Analyst price targets imply -7.6% upside for NTRA and -13.4% for RVTY, so the Street currently favors NTRA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors RVTY. 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, NTRA or RVTY?
RVTY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. RVTY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 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, NTRA or RVTY?
RVTY 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, NTRA or RVTY?
RVTY on the Momentum factor, by 18 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, NTRA or RVTY?
NTRA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NTRA carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is NTRA more profitable than RVTY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 65.3% vs 52.1%; operating margin -10.7% vs 12.3%; ttm roe -11.7% vs 3.3%. NTRA leads on one measure and RVTY 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 RVTY's lead over NTRA getting stronger or weaker?
RVTY lead: Reversed — NTRA led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RVTY now leads by 5. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-07, when NTRA moved ahead of RVTY.
What would change the NTRA vs RVTY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NTRA closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to RVTY's edge; NTRA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; RVTY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about NTRA and RVTY?
NTRA: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. RVTY: 5 bullish / 1 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 NTRA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On RVTY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare NTRA and RVTY with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.