AVGO vs PDM Stock Comparison
Broadcom Inc. vs Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc.
PDM leads
PDM leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from AVGO. Wall Street currently favors AVGO on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support PDM, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Broadcom Inc.
Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PDM over AVGO, 52 versus 47 as of Sep 5, 2026. PDM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while AVGO holds the stronger quality profile. PDM 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 PDM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. PDM lead: Reversed — AVGO led by 13 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PDM now leads by 5.
Compare Broadcom Inc. and Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare AVGO and PDM 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.
- Quality30%85 vs 20AVGO +65
- Momentum25%20 vs 68PDM +48
- Value30%30 vs 73PDM +43
- Risk Resilience15%52 vs 50Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor PDM. PDM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; AVGO keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.79%)
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No new signals fired.
PDM's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AVGO and PDM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PDM (Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
AVGO (Broadcom Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 36.2% against 21.3%.
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
PDMPDM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
AVGOAVGO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PDMPDM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 43 points.
Momentum
PDMPDM on the Momentum factor, by 48 points.
Lower downside
PDMPDM 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 PDM, analyst targets favor AVGO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AVGO | PDM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +40.1% | +6.7% | AVGO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +36.3% | +9.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 2 | 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 PDM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PDM | 47 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | AVGO | EPS growth 26.5% vs 11.3%; TTM ROE 36.4% vs -5.4%; gross margin 67% vs 28.6%; operating margin 43.7% vs 23.3% |
| Valuation | PDM | Value 30 vs 73 |
| Technicals | PDM | Price vs 50-day -6.8% vs 0.9%; vs 200-day -3.4% vs 14.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 52 vs 50 |
| Analyst expectations | AVGO | Target upside 40.1% vs 6.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AVGO and PDM 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 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 PDM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3PDM lead: Reversed — AVGO led by 13 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PDM now leads by 5.
- Today
- PDM +5
- 47 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- PDM +7
- 45 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- AVGO +13
- 62 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 49 vs 49
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when PDM 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.
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.87%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.79%)
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.65%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
PDM 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.21%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.1%, 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.
- 1AVGO closes the Momentum gap — currently 48 points behind, the largest single contributor to PDM's edge.
- 2AVGO's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3PDM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
AVGO leads on balance| Metric | AVGO | PDM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 14.9% | 0.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 26.5% | 11.3% |
| Gross margin | 67% | 28.6% |
| Operating margin | 43.7% | 23.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 36.4% | -5.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.74 | 1.54 |
Technicals
PDM has the stronger structure| Metric | AVGO | PDM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.4 | 57.4 |
| ADX (14) | 22.7 | 11.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.8% | 0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.4% | 14.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 36.2% | 21.3% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AVGO | PDM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.15 | 0.65 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.51 | 0.43 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.76 | 0.61 |
| Max drawdown | -28.9% | -29.5% |
| Current drawdown | -25.8% | -2.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 48.5% | 31.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.4% | -3.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AVGO or PDM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PDM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 52 against AVGO's 47. 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 PDM the better buy right now?
PDM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 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 PDM over AVGO?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. AVGO leads Quality by 65 points; PDM leads Momentum by 48 points; PDM leads Value by 43 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AVGO or PDM?
Analyst price targets imply +40.1% upside for AVGO and +6.7% for PDM, so the Street currently favors AVGO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PDM. 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 PDM?
PDM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PDM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 43 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 PDM?
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 PDM?
PDM on the Momentum factor, by 48 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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 PDM?
PDM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PDM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AVGO more profitable than PDM?
AVGO leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 67% vs 28.6%; operating margin 43.7% vs 23.3%; ttm roe 36.4% vs -5.4%.
Is PDM's lead over AVGO getting stronger or weaker?
PDM lead: Reversed — AVGO led by 13 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PDM now leads by 5. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-02, when PDM moved ahead of AVGO.
What would change the AVGO vs PDM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AVGO closes the Momentum gap — currently 48 points behind, the largest single contributor to PDM's edge; AVGO's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; PDM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about AVGO and PDM?
AVGO: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. PDM: 3 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 AVGO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PDM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AVGO and PDM with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.