PGR vs WRB Stock Comparison
PGR currently leads WRB in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 68 vs 64. The clearest difference is momentum, while WRB has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between PGR and WRB?
PGR leads the current stock comparison as The Progressive Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
The Progressive Corporation vs W. R. Berkley Corporation
PGR leads
PGR leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from WRB.
Fragile: 5 of 6 evidence groups support PGR, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
The Progressive Corporation
W. R. Berkley Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PGR over WRB, 68 versus 64 as of Oct 31, 2026. PGR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while WRB holds the stronger risk resilience profile. PGR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PGR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. PGR lead: Reversed — WRB led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PGR now leads by 4.
Compare The Progressive Corporation and W. R. Berkley 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 PGR and WRB 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.
- Risk Resilience46 vs 59WRB +13
- Momentum72 vs 60PGR +12
- Value59 vs 50PGR +9
- Quality83 vs 83Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor PGR. PGR’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; WRB keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -9
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
PGR's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PGR and WRB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PGR (The Progressive Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
WRB (W. R. Berkley Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience.
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
PGRPGR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PGRPGR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 points.
Momentum
PGRPGR on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
WRBWRB on Risk Resilience, by 13 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 | WRB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -3.9% | -5.5% | PGR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +22% | +27.2% | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | PGR | WRB |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 0.00% | -4.04% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.300 | $0.209 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.300 | $0.170 |
| Years increased | 1 | 2 |
| No cut in window | No (2) | No (3) |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
PGR grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 0.00% a year against WRB's -4.04%.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 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 | PGR | 68 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | PGRon balance | revenue growth -1.8% vs -45.3%; TTM ROE 35.4% vs 25.1%; gross margin 48.1% vs 61.9%; operating margin 16% vs 13.2% — PGR takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | PGR | Value 59 vs 50 |
| Technicals | PGR | Price vs 50-day 6.5% vs 5%; vs 200-day 8% vs 3.6% |
| Risk Resilience | WRB | Risk Resilience 46 vs 59 |
| Analyst expectations | PGR | Target upside -3.9% vs -5.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PGR and WRB 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)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (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 PGR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28PGR lead: Reversed — WRB led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PGR now leads by 4.
- Today
- PGR +4
- 68 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- PGR +7
- 70 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- WRB +1
- 59 vs 60
- 90 sessions ago
- PGR +15
- 66 vs 51
The lead changed hands 10 times in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when PGR moved ahead of WRB.
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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish
Only PGR
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only WRB
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active.
WRB 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 +0.48%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.04%, AIQ -2 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.
- 1WRB closes the Momentum gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to PGR's edge.
- 2WRB generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3PGR's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
PGR leads on balance| Metric | PGR | WRB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -1.8% | -45.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -23.1% | -0.9% |
| Gross margin | 48.1% | 61.9% |
| Operating margin | 16% | 13.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 35.4% | 25.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.24 | 0 |
Performance
PGR leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | PGR | WRB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.9% | -3.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 8.9% | 6.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.8% | -2.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 12.5% | 7% |
| Year to date | -0.9% | 2.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 3% | -4.5% |
Technicals
PGR has the stronger structure| Metric | PGR | WRB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 58.7 | 48.4 |
| ADX (14) | 14.2 | 29.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.5% | 5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8% | 3.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.1% | 24.5% |
Risk
WRB is the more resilient| Metric | PGR | WRB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.5 | -0.36 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.22 | -0.13 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.29 | -0.18 |
| Max drawdown | -19.4% | -18.6% |
| Current drawdown | -4.5% | -8.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.3% | 22.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PGR or WRB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PGR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 68 against WRB's 64. The edge comes from momentum and value. WRB 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 WRB the better buy right now?
PGR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 5 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 PGR over WRB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WRB leads Risk Resilience by 13 points; PGR leads Momentum by 12 points; PGR leads Value by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PGR or WRB?
Analyst price targets imply -3.9% upside for PGR and -5.5% for WRB, 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 WRB?
PGR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PGR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 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 WRB?
PGR 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 WRB?
PGR on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, PGR or WRB?
WRB is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WRB on Risk Resilience, by 13 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 WRB?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 48.1% vs 61.9%; operating margin 16% vs 13.2%; ttm roe 35.4% vs 25.1%. PGR leads on two measures and WRB 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 WRB getting stronger or weaker?
PGR lead: Reversed — WRB led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PGR now leads by 4. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 10 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-19, when PGR moved ahead of WRB.
What would change the PGR vs WRB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: WRB closes the Momentum gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to PGR's edge; WRB generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; PGR's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 WRB?
PGR: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. WRB: 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 PGR is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On WRB it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PGR and WRB 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.