ODFL vs UNP Stock Comparison
UNP currently leads ODFL in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 64 vs 61. The clearest difference is value, while ODFL has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between ODFL and UNP?
UNP leads the current stock comparison as Union Pacific Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. vs Union Pacific Corporation
UNP leads
UNP leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 0 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors ODFL on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support UNP, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc.
Union Pacific Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors UNP over ODFL, 64 versus 61 as of Oct 21, 2026. UNP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while ODFL holds the stronger risk resilience profile. UNP also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ODFL. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor UNP today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. UNP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. and Union Pacific Corporation 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 ODFL and UNP 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.
- Value32 vs 43UNP +11
- Momentum78 vs 85UNP +7
- Risk Resilience72 vs 67ODFL +5
- Quality69 vs 67Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor UNP. UNP’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; ODFL keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +17
New signals
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +13
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
UNP's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ODFL and UNP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
UNP (Union Pacific Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
ODFL (Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 23.3% against 12.4%.
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
UNPUNP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ODFLODFL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
UNPUNP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
UNPUNP on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
ODFLODFL on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
ODFLODFL on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors UNP, analyst targets favor ODFL. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ODFL | UNP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +21.8% | +10.4% | ODFL has more room |
| Target dispersion | +27.4% | +28% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 10 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | ODFL | UNP |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 30.00% | 6.99% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.302 | $3.880 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.120 | $5.440 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #1 | #193 |
ODFL grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 30.00% a year against UNP's 6.99%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor UNP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 61 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | UNPon balance | revenue growth 16.4% vs 10.4%; EPS growth 47.4% vs 17.1%; TTM ROE 24.9% vs 38.6%; gross margin 31.7% vs 45.5%; operating margin 25.8% vs 39.9% — UNP takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | UNP | Value 32 vs 43 |
| Technicals | UNP | Price vs 50-day 0.4% vs 0.1%; vs 200-day -6.4% vs 7.5% |
| Risk Resilience | ODFL | Risk Resilience 72 vs 67 |
| Analyst expectations | ODFL | Target upside 21.8% vs 10.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ODFL and UNP 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 UNP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20UNP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- UNP +3
- 61 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- UNP +7
- 57 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 50 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- UNP +10
- 49 vs 59
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Oct 2 when UNP moved ahead of ODFL.
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, conflicted
Only ODFL
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.99%)
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only UNP
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.43%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: RSI Overbought, MACD Bullish Crossover.
UNP 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.3%, AIQ +5 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.09%, 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.
- 1ODFL closes the Value gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to UNP's edge.
- 2ODFL's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3UNP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 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
UNP leads on balance| Metric | ODFL | UNP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 16.4% | 10.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 47.4% | 17.1% |
| Gross margin | 31.7% | 45.5% |
| Operating margin | 25.8% | 39.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 24.9% | 38.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0 | 1.51 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ODFL | UNP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.8% | 1.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 6.2% | 4.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -19.1% | -1.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -15.5% | 14.5% |
| Year to date | 20.1% | 24.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 36.4% | 28.4% |
Technicals
UNP has the stronger structure| Metric | ODFL | UNP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 75.5 | 78.9 |
| ADX (14) | 30.3 | 26.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.4% | 0.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -6.4% | 7.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 23.3% | 12.4% |
Risk
ODFL is the more resilient| Metric | ODFL | UNP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.93 | 0.17 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.91 | 1.01 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.4 | 1.57 |
| Max drawdown | -30.4% | -13.2% |
| Current drawdown | -24.3% | -7.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 37.7% | 22.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -2.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ODFL or UNP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, UNP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 64 against ODFL's 61. The edge comes from value and momentum. ODFL 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 ODFL or UNP the better buy right now?
UNP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor UNP over ODFL?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. UNP leads Value by 11 points; UNP leads Momentum by 7 points; ODFL leads Risk Resilience by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ODFL or UNP?
Analyst price targets imply +21.8% upside for ODFL and +10.4% for UNP, so the Street currently favors ODFL. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors UNP. 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, ODFL or UNP?
UNP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. UNP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, ODFL or UNP?
ODFL 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, ODFL or UNP?
UNP on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, ODFL or UNP?
ODFL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ODFL on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 ODFL more profitable than UNP?
UNP leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 31.7% vs 45.5%; operating margin 25.8% vs 39.9%; ttm roe 24.9% vs 38.6%.
Is UNP's lead over ODFL getting stronger or weaker?
UNP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-10-02, when UNP moved ahead of ODFL.
What would change the ODFL vs UNP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ODFL closes the Value gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to UNP's edge; ODFL's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; UNP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 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 ODFL and UNP?
ODFL: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. UNP: 4 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 ODFL is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On UNP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ODFL and UNP 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.