PKG vs SW Stock Comparison
Compare PKG and SW across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between PKG and SW?
SW leads the current stock comparison as Smurfit Westrock plc, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Packaging Corporation of America vs Smurfit Westrock plc
SW leads
SW leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from PKG.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support SW, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Packaging Corporation of America
Smurfit Westrock plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SW over PKG, 40 versus 39 as of Sep 6, 2026. SW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while PKG holds the stronger risk resilience profile. SW also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SW today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. SW lead: Reversed — PKG led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SW now leads by 1.
Compare Packaging Corporation of America and Smurfit Westrock plc 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 SW 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.
- Momentum25%26 vs 38SW +12
- Risk Resilience15%70 vs 58PKG +12
- Quality30%40 vs 29PKG +11
- Value30%34 vs 44SW +10
2 of 6 evidence groups favor SW. SW’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; 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.
SW's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PKG and SW both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SW (Smurfit Westrock plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
PKG (Packaging Corporation of America): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality, fundamentals.
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
SWSW on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
SWSW on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SWSW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
SWSW on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
PKGPKG on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
SWSW 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 | PKG | SW | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.9% | +46% | SW has more room |
| Target dispersion | +30.4% | +179.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 8 | 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 SW. 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 | 39 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | PKGon balance | revenue growth 5.2% vs 19.9%; EPS growth 12.5% vs 23.1%; TTM ROE 14.9% vs 2.7%; gross margin 20.1% vs 17.9%; operating margin 12.7% vs 5.4% — PKG takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SW | Value 34 vs 44 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -2.1% vs -1.9%; vs 200-day 6.3% vs 8% |
| Risk Resilience | PKG | Risk Resilience 70 vs 58 |
| Analyst expectations | SW | Target upside 10.9% vs 46% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PKG and SW 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 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 leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 SW.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5SW lead: Reversed — PKG led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SW now leads by 1.
- Today
- SW +1
- 39 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- SW +6
- 38 vs 44
- 30 sessions ago
- PKG +3
- 48 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- PKG +3
- 52 vs 49
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
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (10.12%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
SW 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 +1.14%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.26%, 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 Momentum gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to SW's edge.
- 2PKG's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3SW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
PKG leads on balance| Metric | PKG | SW |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.2% | 19.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 12.5% | 23.1% |
| Gross margin | 20.1% | 17.9% |
| Operating margin | 12.7% | 5.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 14.9% | 2.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.94 | 0.79 |
Performance
SW leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | PKG | SW |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.3% | -5.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.3% | -5.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 6.5% | 11% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.6% | 7% |
| Year to date | 15% | 18.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 11.4% | -2.4% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | PKG | SW |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 32.1 | 40.2 |
| ADX (14) | 18.6 | 13.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.1% | -1.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.3% | 8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 19.6% | 32.3% |
Risk
PKG is the more resilient| Metric | PKG | SW |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.72 | 1.48 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.32 | 0.11 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.51 | 0.18 |
| Max drawdown | -17.7% | -31.3% |
| Current drawdown | -7.8% | -11.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 28% | 44.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.7% | -4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PKG or SW?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SW is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 40 against PKG's 39. The edge comes from momentum and value. 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 SW the better buy right now?
SW carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor SW over PKG?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. SW leads Momentum by 12 points; PKG leads Risk Resilience by 12 points; PKG leads Quality by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PKG or SW?
Analyst price targets imply +10.9% upside for PKG and +46% for SW, so the Street currently favors SW. 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, PKG or SW?
SW is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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 SW?
SW 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 SW?
SW on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, PKG or SW?
PKG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PKG on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 SW?
PKG leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 20.1% vs 17.9%; operating margin 12.7% vs 5.4%; ttm roe 14.9% vs 2.7%.
Is SW's lead over PKG getting stronger or weaker?
SW lead: Reversed — PKG led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SW now leads by 1. 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 SW verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PKG closes the Momentum gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to SW's edge; PKG's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; SW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 PKG and SW?
PKG: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. SW: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, 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 PKG is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SW it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PKG and SW 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.