OI vs SEE Stock Comparison
SEE currently leads OI in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 54 vs 42. The clearest difference is quality, while OI has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between OI and SEE?
SEE leads the current stock comparison as Sealed Air Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
O-I Glass, Inc. vs Sealed Air Corporation
SEE leads
SEE leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 18 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors OI on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support SEE, and its lead is narrowing.
O-I Glass, Inc.
Sealed Air Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SEE over OI, 54 versus 42 as of Oct 21, 2026. SEE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while OI holds the stronger value profile. SEE also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors OI. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SEE today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. SEE lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare O-I Glass, Inc. and Sealed Air 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 OI and SEE 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.
- Quality7 vs 53SEE +46
- Value74 vs 57OI +17
- Risk Resilience38 vs 49SEE +11
4 of 6 evidence groups favor SEE. SEE’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; OI keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session.
SEE's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — OI and SEE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SEE (Sealed Air Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
OI (O-I Glass, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 37.9% against 2.3%.
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
SEESEE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
OIOI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
OIOI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
SEESEE on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
OIOI on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SEE, analyst targets favor OI. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | OI | SEE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +70.9% | -0.4% | OI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +77.5% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 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 SEE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SEE | 42 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | SEEon balance | revenue growth 8.3% vs 3.7%; EPS growth -12.2% vs -38.9%; TTM ROE -107.8% vs 48.4%; gross margin 14.8% vs 29.8%; operating margin 8% vs 13.5% — SEE takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | OI | Value 74 vs 57 |
| Technicals | SEE | Price vs 50-day -5.5% vs 0.5%; vs 200-day -40% vs 13% |
| Risk Resilience | SEE | Risk Resilience 38 vs 49 |
| Analyst expectations | OI | Target upside 70.9% vs -0.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of OI and SEE and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 SEE.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SEE lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SEE +12
- 42 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- SEE +13
- 41 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- SEE +18
- 36 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- SEE +19
- 35 vs 54
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only OI
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (54.13%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.34%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
No active signals
No signal that the other name lacks.
OI 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.2%, 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.
- 1OI closes the Quality gap — currently 46 points behind, the largest single contributor to SEE's edge.
- 2OI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3SEE starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 6 points over 30 sessions, and a further 12-point move would eliminate SEE's advantage entirely.
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
SEE leads on balance| Metric | OI | SEE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.3% | 3.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -12.2% | -38.9% |
| Gross margin | 14.8% | 29.8% |
| Operating margin | 8% | 13.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -107.8% | 48.4% |
| Debt to equity | 13.02 | 3.31 |
Performance
SEE leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | OI | SEE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.2% | 0.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.5% | 0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -34.6% | 1.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -44.1% | 15% |
| Year to date | -60% | 1.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -51% | 47.7% |
Technicals
SEE has the stronger structure| Metric | OI | SEE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 59 | 81.2 |
| ADX (14) | 28.9 | 14.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.5% | 0.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -40% | 13% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.9% | 2.3% |
Risk
SEE is the more resilient| Metric | OI | SEE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.16 | -0.3 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.16 | 1.44 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.55 | 3.19 |
| Max drawdown | -66.5% | -8.6% |
| Current drawdown | -64.5% | -2.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 53.7% | 28% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.8% | -1.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, OI or SEE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SEE is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 54 against OI's 42. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. OI is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 OI or SEE the better buy right now?
SEE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor SEE over OI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SEE leads Quality by 46 points; OI leads Value by 17 points; SEE leads Risk Resilience by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, OI or SEE?
Analyst price targets imply +70.9% upside for OI and -0.4% for SEE, so the Street currently favors OI. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SEE. 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, OI or SEE?
OI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. OI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 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, OI or SEE?
OI 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, OI or SEE?
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, OI or SEE?
SEE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SEE on Risk Resilience, by 11 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 OI more profitable than SEE?
SEE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 14.8% vs 29.8%; operating margin 8% vs 13.5%; ttm roe -107.8% vs 48.4%.
Is SEE's lead over OI getting stronger or weaker?
SEE lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 12 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the OI vs SEE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: OI closes the Quality gap — currently 46 points behind, the largest single contributor to SEE's edge; OI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; SEE starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 6 points over 30 sessions, and a further 12-point move would eliminate SEE's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about OI and SEE?
OI: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. SEE: No active signals. 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 OI is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare OI and SEE 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.