PNW vs POR Stock Comparison
PNW currently leads POR in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 56 vs 46. The clearest difference is momentum, while POR has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between PNW and POR?
PNW leads the current stock comparison as Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation vs Portland General Electric Company
PNW leads
PNW leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum. Wall Street currently favors POR on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support PNW, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation
Portland General Electric Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PNW over POR, 56 versus 46 as of Oct 31, 2026. PNW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while POR holds the stronger value profile. PNW also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors POR. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PNW today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. PNW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Pinnacle West Capital Corporation and Portland General Electric Company 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 PNW 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.
- Momentum79 vs 35PNW +44
- Value55 vs 59POR +4
- Risk Resilience52 vs 56POR +4
- Quality40 vs 37Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor PNW. PNW’s edge is concentrated in momentum; POR keeps a meaningful value 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 -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
PNW's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PNW and POR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PNW (Pinnacle West Capital Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
POR (Portland General Electric Company): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation.
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
PNWPNW 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 4 points.
Momentum
PNWPNW on the Momentum factor, by 44 points.
Lower downside
PORPOR on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
PORPOR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors PNW, analyst targets favor POR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | PNW | POR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -2.6% | +18.2% | POR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +35.7% | +19% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 2 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | PNW | POR |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 2.50% | 5.54% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $3.178 | $1.585 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $3.595 | $2.075 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #316 | #227 |
POR grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 5.54% a year against PNW's 2.50%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PNW. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PNW | 56 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | PNWon balance | revenue growth 26.6% vs -10.5%; EPS growth 4.4% vs 43.9%; TTM ROE 9% vs 6.3%; gross margin 55.5% vs 44.4%; operating margin 27% vs 15.5% — PNW takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | POR | Value 55 vs 59 |
| Technicals | PNW | Price vs 50-day 8.4% vs -4.9%; vs 200-day 4.6% vs -11.6% |
| Risk Resilience | POR | Risk Resilience 52 vs 56 |
| Analyst expectations | POR | Target upside -2.6% vs 18.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PNW 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 moderate at 10 points.
- Only 3 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 PNW.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28PNW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PNW +10
- 56 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- PNW +9
- 57 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- PNW +9
- 52 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- POR +5
- 46 vs 51
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Aug 13 when POR moved ahead of PNW.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only PNW
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only POR
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (1.8%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
PNW 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 -0.34%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.52%, 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.
- 1POR closes the Momentum gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to PNW's edge.
- 2POR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3PNW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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
PNW leads on balance| Metric | PNW | POR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 26.6% | -10.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 4.4% | 43.9% |
| Gross margin | 55.5% | 44.4% |
| Operating margin | 27% | 15.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9% | 6.3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.62 | 1.26 |
Performance
PNW leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | PNW | POR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.9% | 0.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 12.7% | -0.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 3.5% | -11.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.1% | -13.3% |
| Year to date | 18.2% | -7.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 13.8% | -3.3% |
Technicals
PNW has the stronger structure| Metric | PNW | POR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 69.4 | 41.6 |
| ADX (14) | 32.9 | 25.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 8.4% | -4.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.6% | -11.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 19.9% | 17.5% |
Risk
POR is the more resilient| Metric | PNW | POR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.13 | -0.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.71 | -0.28 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.23 | -0.42 |
| Max drawdown | -16.7% | -19.8% |
| Current drawdown | -4.1% | -18.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.1% | 19.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.7% | -1.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PNW or POR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PNW is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 56 against POR's 46. The edge comes from momentum. 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 PNW or POR the better buy right now?
PNW carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor PNW over POR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PNW leads Momentum by 44 points; POR leads Value by 4 points; POR leads Risk Resilience by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PNW or POR?
Analyst price targets imply -2.6% upside for PNW and +18.2% for POR, so the Street currently favors POR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PNW. 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, PNW or POR?
POR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. POR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 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, PNW 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, PNW or POR?
PNW on the Momentum factor, by 44 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, PNW or POR?
POR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. POR on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 PNW more profitable than POR?
PNW leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 55.5% vs 44.4%; operating margin 27% vs 15.5%; ttm roe 9% vs 6.3%.
Is PNW's lead over POR getting stronger or weaker?
PNW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-08-13, when POR moved ahead of PNW.
What would change the PNW vs POR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: POR closes the Momentum gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to PNW's edge; POR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; PNW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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 PNW and POR?
PNW: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. POR: 1 bullish / 3 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 PNW is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On POR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare PNW 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.