PEG vs POR Stock Comparison
Compare PEG and POR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between PEG and POR?
PEG leads the current stock comparison as Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated vs Portland General Electric Company
PEG leads
PEG leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from POR.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support PEG, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated
Portland General Electric Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PEG over POR, 47 versus 45 as of Sep 11, 2026. PEG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while POR holds the stronger value profile. PEG also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PEG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. PEG lead: Reversed — POR led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PEG now leads by 2.
Compare Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated and Portland General Electric Company 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 PEG and POR 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.
- Quality50 vs 37PEG +13
- Value53 vs 59POR +6
- Momentum31 vs 30Even
- Risk Resilience56 vs 57Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor PEG. PEG’s edge is concentrated in quality; POR keeps a meaningful value 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 +2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
New signals
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.06%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
PEG's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PEG and POR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PEG (Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
POR (Portland General Electric Company): the counter-case, on value, valuation, technicals.
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
PEGPEG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PORPOR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PORPOR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
PEGPEG carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
PEGPEG 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 | PEG | POR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20% | +8.5% | PEG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +17.3% | +5.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 2 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PEG. 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 | 47 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | PEGon balance | revenue growth -33.6% vs -10.5%; EPS growth -55% vs 43.9%; TTM ROE 11.7% vs 6.3%; gross margin 85.4% vs 44.4%; operating margin 23.1% vs 15.5% — PEG takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | POR | Value 53 vs 59 |
| Technicals | POR | Price vs 50-day -5.6% vs -4.6%; vs 200-day -9.2% vs -4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 56 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | PEG | Target upside 20% vs 8.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PEG and POR 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 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 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 PEG.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10PEG lead: Reversed — POR led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PEG now leads by 2.
- Today
- PEG +2
- 47 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- PEG +3
- 47 vs 44
- 30 sessions ago
- POR +2
- 46 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- PEG +1
- 56 vs 55
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when PEG moved ahead of POR.
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 / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.06%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.2%)
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.06%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
PEG 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 -0.12%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.66%, 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.
- 1POR closes the Quality gap — currently 13 points behind, the largest single contributor to PEG's edge.
- 2POR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3PEG'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
PEG leads on balance| Metric | PEG | POR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -33.6% | -10.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -55% | 43.9% |
| Gross margin | 85.4% | 44.4% |
| Operating margin | 23.1% | 15.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.7% | 6.3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.42 | 1.26 |
Performance
POR leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | PEG | POR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.1% | -0.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.5% | -0.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.8% | -4.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -11.9% | -6.8% |
| Year to date | -8.8% | 1.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -9.6% | 15.4% |
Technicals
POR has the stronger structure| Metric | PEG | POR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.8 | 35.6 |
| ADX (14) | 23.9 | 11.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.6% | -4.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -9.2% | -4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.2% | 17.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | PEG | POR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.1 | -0.06 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.65 | 0.61 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.99 | 0.97 |
| Max drawdown | -16.6% | -12.8% |
| Current drawdown | -16.6% | -10.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 18.5% | 18.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -1.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PEG or POR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PEG is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 47 against POR's 45. The edge comes from quality. POR 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 PEG or POR the better buy right now?
PEG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor PEG over POR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PEG leads Quality by 13 points; POR leads Value by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PEG or POR?
Analyst price targets imply +20% upside for PEG and +8.5% for POR, so the Street currently favors PEG. 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, PEG or POR?
POR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. POR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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, PEG or POR?
POR 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, PEG or POR?
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, PEG or POR?
PEG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PEG 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 PEG more profitable than POR?
PEG leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 85.4% vs 44.4%; operating margin 23.1% vs 15.5%; ttm roe 11.7% vs 6.3%.
Is PEG's lead over POR getting stronger or weaker?
PEG lead: Reversed — POR led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PEG now leads by 2. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-02, when PEG moved ahead of POR.
What would change the PEG vs POR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: POR closes the Quality gap — currently 13 points behind, the largest single contributor to PEG's edge; POR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; PEG'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 PEG and POR?
PEG: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. POR: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 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 PEG is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On POR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare PEG and POR 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.