PRVA vs UNH Stock Comparison
Compare PRVA and UNH across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between PRVA and UNH?
UNH leads the current stock comparison as UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Privia Health Group, Inc. vs UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
UNH leads
UNH leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors PRVA on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support UNH, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Privia Health Group, Inc.
UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors UNH over PRVA, 53 versus 39 as of Sep 11, 2026. UNH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while PRVA holds the stronger risk resilience profile. UNH also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors PRVA. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor UNH today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. UNH lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Privia Health Group, Inc. and UnitedHealth Group Incorporated 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 PRVA and UNH 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 vs 52UNH +27
- Value42 vs 59UNH +17
- Risk Resilience71 vs 59PRVA +12
- Quality33 vs 44UNH +11
4 of 6 evidence groups favor UNH. UNH’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; PRVA keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No new signals fired.
UNH's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PRVA and UNH both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
UNH (UnitedHealth Group Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
PRVA (Privia Health Group, Inc.): the counter-case, on 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
UNHUNH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PRVAPRVA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
UNHUNH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
UNHUNH on the Momentum factor, by 27 points.
Lower downside
PRVAPRVA on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
PRVAPRVA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors UNH, analyst targets favor PRVA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | PRVA | UNH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +33.8% | +23.7% | PRVA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +29.3% | +33.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 18 | 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 UNH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | UNH | 39 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | UNHon balance | EPS growth 183.4% vs -12.3%; gross margin 7.6% vs 22.5%; operating margin 1.9% vs 4.8% — UNH takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | UNH | Value 42 vs 59 |
| Technicals | UNH | Price vs 50-day -13.5% vs -7.6%; vs 200-day -12.1% vs 10.1% |
| Risk Resilience | PRVA | Risk Resilience 71 vs 59 |
| Analyst expectations | PRVA | Target upside 33.8% vs 23.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PRVA and UNH 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 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 UNH.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10UNH lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- UNH +14
- 39 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- UNH +14
- 39 vs 53
- 30 sessions ago
- UNH +6
- 38 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- UNH +2
- 53 vs 55
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.
3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.78%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (16.27%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
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 +0.25%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -2.37%, 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.
- 1PRVA closes the Momentum gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to UNH's edge.
- 2PRVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3UNH'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
UNH leads on balance| Metric | PRVA | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4.8% | 0.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 183.4% | -12.3% |
| Gross margin | 7.6% | 22.5% |
| Operating margin | 1.9% | 4.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 0% | 14.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.01 | 0.7 |
Performance
UNH leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | PRVA | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.7% | -2.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.4% | -4.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11% | -4.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -7.7% | 36.1% |
| Year to date | -14.1% | 17.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.9% | 23.1% |
Technicals
UNH has the stronger structure| Metric | PRVA | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28 | 52.7 |
| ADX (14) | 28.9 | 20.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -13.5% | -7.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12.1% | 10.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 16.1% | 19.9% |
Risk
PRVA is the more resilient| Metric | PRVA | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.63 | 0.43 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.4 | 0.38 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.65 | 0.46 |
| Max drawdown | -27.5% | -30% |
| Current drawdown | -27.5% | -11% |
| Annualized volatility | 32% | 34.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PRVA or UNH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, UNH is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 53 against PRVA's 39. The edge comes from momentum and value. PRVA 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 PRVA or UNH the better buy right now?
UNH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 UNH over PRVA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. UNH leads Momentum by 27 points; UNH leads Value by 17 points; PRVA leads Risk Resilience by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PRVA or UNH?
Analyst price targets imply +33.8% upside for PRVA and +23.7% for UNH, so the Street currently favors PRVA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors UNH. 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, PRVA or UNH?
UNH is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. UNH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 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, PRVA or UNH?
PRVA 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, PRVA or UNH?
UNH on the Momentum factor, by 27 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, PRVA or UNH?
PRVA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PRVA on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 PRVA more profitable than UNH?
UNH leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 7.6% vs 22.5%; operating margin 1.9% vs 4.8%; ttm roe 0% vs 14.4%.
Is UNH's lead over PRVA getting stronger or weaker?
UNH lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the PRVA vs UNH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PRVA closes the Momentum gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to UNH's edge; PRVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; UNH'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 PRVA and UNH?
PRVA: 3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. UNH: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. The most decision-relevant rule on PRVA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On UNH it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PRVA and UNH 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.