PGR vs PRU Stock Comparison
Compare PGR and PRU across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between PGR and PRU?
PGR leads the current stock comparison as The Progressive Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
The Progressive Corporation vs Prudential Financial, Inc.
PGR leads
PGR leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support PGR, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The Progressive Corporation
Prudential Financial, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PGR over PRU, 57 versus 56 as of Sep 11, 2026. PGR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while PRU holds the stronger risk resilience profile. PGR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PGR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. PGR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare The Progressive Corporation and Prudential Financial, 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 PGR and PRU 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.
- Quality74 vs 46PGR +28
- Risk Resilience46 vs 73PRU +27
- Value59 vs 70PRU +11
- Momentum41 vs 43Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor PGR. PGR’s edge is concentrated in quality; PRU keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 -4
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No new signals fired.
PGR's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PGR and PRU both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PGR (The Progressive Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
PRU (Prudential Financial, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, value, valuation.
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
PGRPGR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PRUPRU on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PRUPRU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
PRUPRU on Risk Resilience, by 27 points.
Analyst upside
PGRPGR 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 | PGR | PRU | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +2.4% | -14.5% | PGR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +22% | +40.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 9 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PGR. 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 | 57 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | Even | EPS growth 18.1% vs 63.4%; TTM ROE 35.4% vs 12%; gross margin 26.9% vs 30.8%; operating margin 16.2% vs 7.7% |
| Valuation | PRU | Value 59 vs 70 |
| Technicals | PRU | Price vs 50-day 0.2% vs -0.4%; vs 200-day 2.7% vs 9.5% |
| Risk Resilience | PRU | Risk Resilience 46 vs 73 |
| Analyst expectations | PGR | Target upside 2.4% vs -14.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PGR and PRU 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 PGR.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10PGR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PGR +1
- 57 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- PGR +7
- 67 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- PGR +3
- 64 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- PGR +3
- 69 vs 66
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 19 when PGR moved ahead of PRU.
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, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.19%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (10.61%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
PGR 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 +0.66%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.64%, 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.
- 1PRU closes the Quality gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to PGR's edge.
- 2PRU's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3PGR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
Split| Metric | PGR | PRU |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.5% | 0.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 18.1% | 63.4% |
| Gross margin | 26.9% | 30.8% |
| Operating margin | 16.2% | 7.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 35.4% | 12% |
| Debt to equity | 0.24 | 0.65 |
Performance
PRU leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | PGR | PRU |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.3% | -1.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4.3% | -3.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.9% | 12.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.4% | 24.5% |
| Year to date | -5.1% | 5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.1% | 11.9% |
Technicals
PRU has the stronger structure| Metric | PGR | PRU |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43.2 | 44.9 |
| ADX (14) | 13.2 | 20.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.2% | -0.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 2.7% | 9.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 27.5% | 22.8% |
Risk
PRU is the more resilient| Metric | PGR | PRU |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.53 | 0.65 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.44 | 0.45 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.56 | 0.59 |
| Max drawdown | -23.5% | -22.5% |
| Current drawdown | -13.1% | -5.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.3% | 22.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PGR or PRU?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PGR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 57 against PRU's 56. The edge comes from quality. PRU 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 PGR or PRU the better buy right now?
PGR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor PGR over PRU?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PGR leads Quality by 28 points; PRU leads Risk Resilience by 27 points; PRU leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PGR or PRU?
Analyst price targets imply +2.4% upside for PGR and -14.5% for PRU, so the Street currently favors PGR. 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, PGR or PRU?
PRU is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PRU 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, PGR or PRU?
PRU 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, PGR or PRU?
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, PGR or PRU?
PRU is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PRU on Risk Resilience, by 27 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 PGR more profitable than PRU?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 26.9% vs 30.8%; operating margin 16.2% vs 7.7%; ttm roe 35.4% vs 12%. PGR leads on two measures and PRU on one measure, 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 PGR's lead over PRU getting stronger or weaker?
PGR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 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 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-19, when PGR moved ahead of PRU.
What would change the PGR vs PRU verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PRU closes the Quality gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to PGR's edge; PRU's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; PGR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 PGR and PRU?
PGR: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. PRU: 1 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 PGR is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PRU it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PGR and PRU 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.