PKG vs SEE Stock Comparison
Compare PKG and SEE across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between PKG and SEE?
SEE leads the current stock comparison as Sealed Air Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Packaging Corporation of America vs Sealed Air Corporation
SEE leads
SEE leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors PKG on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support SEE, and its lead is widening.
Packaging Corporation of America
Sealed Air Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SEE over PKG, 54 versus 39 as of Sep 6, 2026. SEE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while PKG holds the stronger risk resilience profile. SEE also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors PKG. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SEE today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. SEE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Packaging Corporation of America and Sealed Air Corporation 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 PKG and SEE 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.
- Value30%34 vs 57SEE +23
- Risk Resilience15%70 vs 49PKG +21
- Quality30%40 vs 53SEE +13
4 of 6 evidence groups favor SEE. SEE’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; PKG keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
SEE's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PKG and SEE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SEE (Sealed Air Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
PKG (Packaging Corporation of America): the counter-case, on risk resilience, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 19.6% against 2.3%.
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
SEESEE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
PKGPKG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SEESEE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
PKGPKG on Risk Resilience, by 21 points.
Analyst upside
PKGPKG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SEE, analyst targets favor PKG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | PKG | SEE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.9% | -0.4% | PKG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +30.4% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 1 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SEE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SEE | 39 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | SEEon balance | revenue growth 5.2% vs 3.7%; EPS growth 12.5% vs -38.9%; TTM ROE 14.9% vs 48.4%; gross margin 20.1% vs 29.8%; operating margin 12.7% vs 13.5% — SEE takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SEE | Value 34 vs 57 |
| Technicals | SEE | Price vs 50-day -2.1% vs 0.5%; vs 200-day 6.3% vs 13% |
| Risk Resilience | PKG | Risk Resilience 70 vs 49 |
| Analyst expectations | PKG | Target upside 10.9% vs -0.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PKG and SEE and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 SEE.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5SEE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SEE +15
- 39 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- SEE +16
- 38 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- SEE +6
- 48 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- SEE +2
- 52 vs 54
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 (8.56%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
No active signals
PKG 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.14%, 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.
- 1PKG closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to SEE's edge.
- 2PKG's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3SEE starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
SEE leads on balance| Metric | PKG | SEE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.2% | 3.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 12.5% | -38.9% |
| Gross margin | 20.1% | 29.8% |
| Operating margin | 12.7% | 13.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 14.9% | 48.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.94 | 3.31 |
Performance
SEE leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | PKG | SEE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.3% | 0.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.3% | 0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 6.5% | 1.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.6% | 15% |
| Year to date | 15% | 1.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 11.4% | 47.7% |
Technicals
SEE has the stronger structure| Metric | PKG | SEE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 32.1 | 81.2 |
| ADX (14) | 18.6 | 14.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.1% | 0.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.3% | 13% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 19.6% | 2.3% |
Risk
PKG is the more resilient| Metric | PKG | SEE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.72 | -0.14 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.32 | 2.06 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.51 | 4.59 |
| Max drawdown | -17.7% | -8.6% |
| Current drawdown | -7.8% | -2.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 28% | 28.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.7% | -1.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PKG or SEE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SEE is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 54 against PKG's 39. The edge comes from value and quality. PKG 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 PKG or SEE the better buy right now?
SEE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor SEE over PKG?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. SEE leads Value by 23 points; PKG leads Risk Resilience by 21 points; SEE leads Quality by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PKG or SEE?
Analyst price targets imply +10.9% upside for PKG and -0.4% for SEE, so the Street currently favors PKG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SEE. 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, PKG or SEE?
SEE is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SEE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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, PKG or SEE?
PKG 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, PKG or SEE?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, PKG or SEE?
PKG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PKG on Risk Resilience, by 21 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is PKG more profitable than SEE?
SEE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 20.1% vs 29.8%; operating margin 12.7% vs 13.5%; ttm roe 14.9% vs 48.4%.
Is SEE's lead over PKG getting stronger or weaker?
SEE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the PKG vs SEE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PKG closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to SEE's edge; PKG's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; SEE starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 PKG and SEE?
PKG: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. SEE: No active signals. 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 PKG is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PKG and SEE 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.