NWN vs OGS Stock Comparison
Compare NWN and OGS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between NWN and OGS?
OGS leads the current stock comparison as ONE Gas, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Northwest Natural Holding Company vs ONE Gas, Inc.
OGS leads
OGS leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support OGS, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Northwest Natural Holding Company
ONE Gas, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors OGS over NWN, 49 versus 44 as of Sep 11, 2026. OGS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality. OGS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor OGS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. OGS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Northwest Natural Holding Company and ONE Gas, 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 NWN and OGS 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.
- Quality33 vs 54OGS +21
- Value61 vs 58Even
- Momentum32 vs 31Even
- Risk Resilience52 vs 52Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor OGS. OGS’s edge is concentrated in quality.
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 -1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
OGS's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NWN and OGS both carry a full feed there.
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
OGSOGS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
OGSOGS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
NWNNWN carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
OGSOGS 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 | NWN | OGS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.5% | +15.3% | OGS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +14.8% | +21.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 6 | 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 OGS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | OGS | 44 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | OGSon balance | revenue growth -50.3% vs -50.5%; EPS growth -99.4% vs -63.9%; TTM ROE 8.3% vs 8.4%; gross margin 45.2% vs 74.6%; operating margin 31.6% vs 20.6% — OGS takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 61 vs 58 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -3.4% vs -2.7%; vs 200-day -1.6% vs -4.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 52 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | OGS | Target upside 11.5% vs 15.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NWN and OGS 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 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 OGS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10OGS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- OGS +5
- 44 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- OGS +11
- 44 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- OGS +7
- 52 vs 59
- 90 sessions ago
- OGS +4
- 48 vs 52
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on May 28 when OGS moved ahead of NWN.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.48%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.72%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
OGS 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 -1.26%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.05%, 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.
- 1NWN closes the Quality gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to OGS's edge.
- 2NWN's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3OGS'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
OGS leads on balance| Metric | NWN | OGS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -50.3% | -50.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -99.4% | -63.9% |
| Gross margin | 45.2% | 74.6% |
| Operating margin | 31.6% | 20.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.3% | 8.4% |
| Debt to equity | 1.73 | 0.96 |
Performance
NWN leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | NWN | OGS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.4% | -2.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.5% | -2.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1.9% | 1.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -4.8% | -9.1% |
| Year to date | 5% | 1.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 19.1% | 4.9% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | NWN | OGS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38.3 | 37.5 |
| ADX (14) | 7.5 | 9.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.4% | -2.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1.6% | -4.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 16.7% | 20.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | NWN | OGS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.35 | -0.21 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.75 | 0.12 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.01 | 0.2 |
| Max drawdown | -14.3% | -16.5% |
| Current drawdown | -12.1% | -13.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 20.7% | 18.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NWN or OGS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, OGS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against NWN's 44. The edge comes from quality. 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 NWN or OGS the better buy right now?
OGS 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: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor OGS over NWN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. OGS leads Quality by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NWN or OGS?
Analyst price targets imply +11.5% upside for NWN and +15.3% for OGS, so the Street currently favors OGS. 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, NWN or OGS?
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, NWN or OGS?
OGS 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, NWN or OGS?
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, NWN or OGS?
NWN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NWN 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 NWN more profitable than OGS?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 45.2% vs 74.6%; operating margin 31.6% vs 20.6%; ttm roe 8.3% vs 8.4%. Each name leads 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 OGS's lead over NWN getting stronger or weaker?
OGS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-05-28, when OGS moved ahead of NWN.
What would change the NWN vs OGS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NWN closes the Quality gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to OGS's edge; NWN's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; OGS'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 NWN and OGS?
NWN: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. OGS: 1 bullish / 3 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 NWN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On OGS it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare NWN and OGS 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.