AVGO vs OR Stock Comparison
Compare AVGO and OR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AVGO and OR?
OR leads the current stock comparison as OR Royalties Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Broadcom Inc. vs OR Royalties Inc.
OR leads
OR leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 17 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AVGO on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support OR, and its lead is narrowing.
Broadcom Inc.
OR Royalties Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors OR over AVGO, 56 versus 52 as of Sep 11, 2026. OR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while AVGO holds the stronger quality profile. OR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AVGO. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor OR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. OR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Broadcom Inc. and OR Royalties 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 AVGO and OR 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.
- Momentum39 vs 56OR +17
- Quality85 vs 80AVGO +5
- Value30 vs 34OR +4
- Risk Resilience52 vs 55Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor OR. OR’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; AVGO keeps a meaningful quality edge.
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 -3
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -14
New signals
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
OR's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AVGO and OR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
OR (OR Royalties Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
AVGO (Broadcom Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, 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
OROR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AVGOAVGO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
OROR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
OROR on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
AVGOAVGO carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
AVGOAVGO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors OR, analyst targets favor AVGO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AVGO | OR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +39.4% | +11.9% | AVGO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +49.5% | +27.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 17 | 3 | 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 OR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | OR | 52 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | AVGOon balance | revenue growth 14.9% vs -3.5%; EPS growth 26.5% vs -15.4%; TTM ROE 36.4% vs 21.8%; gross margin 67% vs 84.5%; operating margin 43.7% vs 76.3% — AVGO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | OR | Value 30 vs 34 |
| Technicals | OR | Price vs 50-day -5.5% vs 10.4%; vs 200-day -2.5% vs -2.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 52 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | AVGO | Target upside 39.4% vs 11.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AVGO and OR 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 4 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 narrowing. (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 OR.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10OR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- OR +4
- 52 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- OR +14
- 47 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- OR +17
- 45 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- AVGO +2
- 50 vs 48
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Aug 14 when OR moved ahead of AVGO.
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, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.55%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (12.99%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.66%)
AVGO 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.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.32%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.53%, AIQ -4 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.
- 1AVGO closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to OR's edge.
- 2AVGO's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3OR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 13 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate OR'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
AVGO leads on balance| Metric | AVGO | OR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 14.9% | -3.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 26.5% | -15.4% |
| Gross margin | 67% | 84.5% |
| Operating margin | 43.7% | 76.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 36.4% | 21.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.74 | 0.15 |
Performance
AVGO leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | AVGO | OR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.7% | -2.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.3% | 6.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3% | 13.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 5.6% | -16.6% |
| Year to date | 4.3% | 1.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 6.9% | 2.4% |
Technicals
OR has the stronger structure| Metric | AVGO | OR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.7 | 52.3 |
| ADX (14) | 23.4 | 28.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.5% | 10.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.5% | -2.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.6% | 48.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AVGO | OR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.16 | 1.44 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.3 | 0.23 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.44 | 0.31 |
| Max drawdown | -28.9% | -41.2% |
| Current drawdown | -25.1% | -24.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 47.5% | 47.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.4% | -5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AVGO or OR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, OR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 56 against AVGO's 52. The edge comes from momentum and value. AVGO 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 AVGO or OR the better buy right now?
OR 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 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor OR over AVGO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. OR leads Momentum by 17 points; AVGO leads Quality by 5 points; OR leads Value by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AVGO or OR?
Analyst price targets imply +39.4% upside for AVGO and +11.9% for OR, so the Street currently favors AVGO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors OR. 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, AVGO or OR?
OR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. OR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 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, AVGO or OR?
AVGO 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, AVGO or OR?
OR on the Momentum factor, by 17 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, AVGO or OR?
AVGO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AVGO 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 AVGO more profitable than OR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 67% vs 84.5%; operating margin 43.7% vs 76.3%; ttm roe 36.4% vs 21.8%. AVGO leads on one measure and OR 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 OR's lead over AVGO getting stronger or weaker?
OR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 4 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 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-14, when OR moved ahead of AVGO.
What would change the AVGO vs OR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AVGO closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to OR's edge; AVGO's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; OR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 13 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate OR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AVGO and OR?
AVGO: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. OR: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 AVGO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On OR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare AVGO and OR 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.