NVT vs WLDN Stock Comparison
WLDN currently leads NVT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 60 vs 39. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between NVT and WLDN?
WLDN leads the current stock comparison as Willdan Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
nVent Electric plc vs Willdan Group, Inc.
WLDN leads
WLDN leads by 21 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from NVT. Wall Street currently favors NVT on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support WLDN, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
nVent Electric plc
Willdan Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors WLDN over NVT, 60 versus 39 as of Oct 31, 2026. WLDN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value. WLDN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors NVT. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WLDN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. WLDN lead: Reversed — NVT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; WLDN now leads by 21. WLDN 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 nVent Electric plc and Willdan Group, Inc. 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 NVT and WLDN 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.
- Momentum17 vs 48WLDN +31
- Value37 vs 66WLDN +29
- Risk Resilience43 vs 61WLDN +18
- Quality56 vs 64WLDN +8
4 of 6 evidence groups favor WLDN. WLDN’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value.
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 -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
WLDN's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NVT and WLDN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
WLDN (Willdan Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
NVT (nVent Electric plc): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 64.1% against 23.2%.
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
WLDNWLDN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WLDNWLDN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
WLDNWLDN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 points.
Momentum
WLDNWLDN on the Momentum factor, by 31 points.
Lower downside
WLDNWLDN on Risk Resilience, by 18 points.
Analyst upside
NVTNVT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors WLDN, analyst targets favor NVT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | NVT | WLDN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +59.8% | +49.5% | NVT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +22.3% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 14 | 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 WLDN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | WLDN | 39 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | WLDNon balance | revenue growth 18.5% vs 48.9%; EPS growth 51.1% vs 179.3%; TTM ROE 15.8% vs 20.9%; gross margin 37% vs 37.8%; operating margin 17.2% vs 7.1% — WLDN takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | WLDN | Value 37 vs 66 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -18.1% vs -6.8%; vs 200-day -3.1% vs -12.9% |
| Risk Resilience | WLDN | Risk Resilience 43 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | NVT | Target upside 59.8% vs 49.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NVT and WLDN 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 wide at 21 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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)
- 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 WLDN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28WLDN lead: Reversed — NVT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; WLDN now leads by 21.
- Today
- WLDN +21
- 39 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- WLDN +19
- 39 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- NVT +1
- 55 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- WLDN +23
- 42 vs 65
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Oct 8 when WLDN moved ahead of NVT.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only NVT
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.35%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only WLDN
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (10.60%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
WLDN 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 -8.81%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -4.76%, 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.
- 1NVT closes the Momentum gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to WLDN's edge.
- 2NVT's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3WLDN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 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
WLDN leads on balance| Metric | NVT | WLDN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.5% | 48.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 51.1% | 179.3% |
| Gross margin | 37% | 37.8% |
| Operating margin | 17.2% | 7.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 15.8% | 20.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.41 | 0.25 |
Performance
WLDN leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | NVT | WLDN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.1% | 4.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -12.6% | 2.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.2% | 8.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 2% | 4.4% |
| Year to date | 37.4% | -26.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 37.1% | -25.7% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | NVT | WLDN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 33.4 | 55.3 |
| ADX (14) | 25.9 | 12.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -18.1% | -6.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.1% | -12.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 64.1% | 23.2% |
Risk
WLDN is the more resilient| Metric | NVT | WLDN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.23 | 1.64 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.77 | -0.11 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.06 | -0.14 |
| Max drawdown | -32% | -50.4% |
| Current drawdown | -24% | -43.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.7% | 58.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.2% | -4.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NVT or WLDN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, WLDN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 60 against NVT's 39. The edge comes from momentum and value. 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 NVT or WLDN the better buy right now?
WLDN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor WLDN over NVT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WLDN leads Momentum by 31 points; WLDN leads Value by 29 points; WLDN leads Risk Resilience by 18 points. WLDN leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by NVT 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, NVT or WLDN?
Analyst price targets imply +59.8% upside for NVT and +49.5% for WLDN, so the Street currently favors NVT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors WLDN. 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, NVT or WLDN?
WLDN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. WLDN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 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, NVT or WLDN?
WLDN 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, NVT or WLDN?
WLDN on the Momentum factor, by 31 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, NVT or WLDN?
WLDN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WLDN on Risk Resilience, by 18 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 NVT more profitable than WLDN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 37% vs 37.8%; operating margin 17.2% vs 7.1%; ttm roe 15.8% vs 20.9%. NVT leads on one measure and WLDN 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 WLDN's lead over NVT getting stronger or weaker?
WLDN lead: Reversed — NVT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; WLDN now leads by 21. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-08, when WLDN moved ahead of NVT.
What would change the NVT vs WLDN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NVT closes the Momentum gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to WLDN's edge; NVT's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; WLDN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 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 NVT and WLDN?
NVT: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WLDN: 1 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 NVT is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On WLDN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare NVT and WLDN 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.