POST vs SMPL Stock Comparison
SMPL currently leads POST in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 54 vs 53. The clearest difference is quality, while POST has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between POST and SMPL?
SMPL leads the current stock comparison as The Simply Good Foods Company, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Post Holdings, Inc. vs The Simply Good Foods Company
SMPL leads
SMPL leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 9 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors POST on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support SMPL, and its lead is narrowing.
Post Holdings, Inc.
The Simply Good Foods Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SMPL over POST, 54 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. SMPL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while POST holds the stronger momentum profile. SMPL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors POST. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SMPL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. SMPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Post Holdings, Inc. and The Simply Good Foods Company across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare POST and SMPL 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.
- Quality21 vs 40SMPL +19
- Momentum74 vs 62POST +12
- Risk Resilience49 vs 39POST +10
- Value68 vs 70Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor SMPL. SMPL’s edge is concentrated in quality; POST keeps a meaningful momentum 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: Risk Resilience +1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +22
New signals
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.3%)
The lead changed hands: SMPL moved ahead of POST in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — POST and SMPL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SMPL (The Simply Good Foods Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
POST (Post Holdings, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, analyst expectations.
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
SMPLSMPL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SMPLSMPL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
POSTPOST on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
POSTPOST on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
POSTPOST on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SMPL, analyst targets favor POST. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | POST | SMPL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +31.5% | +27.4% | POST has more room |
| Target dispersion | +36.6% | +55.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 7 | 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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SMPL. 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 | 53 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | SMPLon balance | revenue growth -4.6% vs 9.5%; EPS growth -17.5% vs 66.5%; TTM ROE 8.7% vs -12.3%; gross margin 26.9% vs 32.1%; operating margin 10.1% vs 5.9% — SMPL takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 68 vs 70 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 6.3% vs 7.9%; vs 200-day -12.9% vs -16.3% |
| Risk Resilience | POST | Risk Resilience 49 vs 39 |
| Analyst expectations | POST | Target upside 31.5% vs 27.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of POST and SMPL 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 leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 SMPL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28SMPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SMPL +1
- 53 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 52 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- SMPL +9
- 41 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- SMPL +8
- 40 vs 48
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Oct 28 when SMPL moved ahead of POST.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only POST
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
Only SMPL
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.31%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.3%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Death Cross Active.
POST 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.92%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +5.53%, AIQ +5 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.
- 1POST closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to SMPL's edge.
- 2POST's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3SMPL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 8 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate SMPL's advantage entirely.
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
SMPL leads on balance| Metric | POST | SMPL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -4.6% | 9.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -17.5% | 66.5% |
| Gross margin | 26.9% | 32.1% |
| Operating margin | 10.1% | 5.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.7% | -12.3% |
| Debt to equity | 2.48 | 0.28 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | POST | SMPL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.8% | 1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 10.2% | 14.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -13.6% | 4.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -21.3% | -20.2% |
| Year to date | -19% | -46% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -26.6% | -50.1% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | POST | SMPL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 71 | 58.2 |
| ADX (14) | 23.1 | 17.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.3% | 7.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12.9% | -16.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 25.3% | 57.3% |
Risk
POST is the more resilient| Metric | POST | SMPL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.11 | 0.18 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.87 | -1.04 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.14 | -1.39 |
| Max drawdown | -36.7% | -55.9% |
| Current drawdown | -29.9% | -49.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 31.8% | 49.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -4.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, POST or SMPL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SMPL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 54 against POST's 53. The edge comes from quality. POST is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 POST or SMPL the better buy right now?
SMPL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 SMPL over POST?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SMPL leads Quality by 19 points; POST leads Momentum by 12 points; POST leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, POST or SMPL?
Analyst price targets imply +31.5% upside for POST and +27.4% for SMPL, so the Street currently favors POST. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SMPL. 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, POST or SMPL?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, POST or SMPL?
SMPL 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, POST or SMPL?
POST 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, POST or SMPL?
POST is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. POST on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 POST more profitable than SMPL?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 26.9% vs 32.1%; operating margin 10.1% vs 5.9%; ttm roe 8.7% vs -12.3%. POST leads on two measures and SMPL 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 SMPL's lead over POST getting stronger or weaker?
SMPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 1 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 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-28, when SMPL moved ahead of POST.
What would change the POST vs SMPL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: POST closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to SMPL's edge; POST's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; SMPL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 8 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate SMPL's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about POST and SMPL?
POST: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. SMPL: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 POST is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On SMPL it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare POST and SMPL 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.