PWR vs URI Stock Comparison
URI currently leads PWR in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 50 vs 35. The clearest difference is momentum, while PWR has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between PWR and URI?
URI leads the current stock comparison as United Rentals, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Quanta Services, Inc. vs United Rentals, Inc.
URI leads
URI leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 0 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors PWR on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support URI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Quanta Services, Inc.
United Rentals, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors URI over PWR, 50 versus 35 as of Oct 22, 2026. URI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while PWR holds the stronger risk resilience profile. URI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors PWR. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor URI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. URI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Quanta Services, Inc. and United Rentals, Inc. 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 PWR and URI 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.
- Momentum17 vs 52URI +35
- Value37 vs 54URI +17
- Risk Resilience46 vs 34PWR +12
- Quality41 vs 51URI +10
4 of 6 evidence groups favor URI. URI’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; PWR keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
URI's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PWR and URI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
URI (United Rentals, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
PWR (Quanta Services, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 39.5% against 33.1%.
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
URIURI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PWRPWR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
URIURI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
URIURI on the Momentum factor, by 35 points.
Lower downside
PWRPWR on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
PWRPWR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors URI, analyst targets favor PWR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | PWR | URI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +29.9% | +18.2% | PWR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +37.8% | +37.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 12 | 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 URI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | URI | 35 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | URIon balance | revenue growth 21.4% vs 10.7%; EPS growth 104.8% vs 41.8%; TTM ROE 14.9% vs 29.2%; gross margin 14.4% vs 37.1%; operating margin 6.2% vs 24.8% — URI takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | URI | Value 37 vs 54 |
| Technicals | URI | Price vs 50-day -7.2% vs 2%; vs 200-day -0.1% vs 8.5% |
| Risk Resilience | PWR | Risk Resilience 46 vs 34 |
| Analyst expectations | PWR | Target upside 29.9% vs 18.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PWR and URI and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 URI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20URI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- URI +15
- 35 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- URI +10
- 40 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 52 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- URI +2
- 53 vs 55
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 13 when URI moved ahead of PWR.
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.
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only PWR
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.53%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only URI
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
URI 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 +0.86%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.41%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1PWR closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to URI's edge.
- 2PWR's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3URI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
URI leads on balance| Metric | PWR | URI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 21.4% | 10.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 104.8% | 41.8% |
| Gross margin | 14.4% | 37.1% |
| Operating margin | 6.2% | 24.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 14.9% | 29.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.69 | 1.67 |
Performance
URI leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | PWR | URI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -12.7% | -1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.3% | 0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.3% | 0.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 4.5% | 29.5% |
| Year to date | 41.2% | 29% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 39.3% | 3.8% |
Technicals
URI has the stronger structure| Metric | PWR | URI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.4 | 59 |
| ADX (14) | 20.4 | 15.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.2% | 2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.1% | 8.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 39.5% | 33.1% |
Risk
PWR is the more resilient| Metric | PWR | URI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.67 | 0.96 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.84 | 0.27 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.46 | 0.43 |
| Max drawdown | -28.5% | -29.1% |
| Current drawdown | -24.1% | -10.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 44.9% | 43.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.4% | -3.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PWR or URI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, URI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 50 against PWR's 35. The edge comes from momentum and value. PWR 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 PWR or URI the better buy right now?
URI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor URI over PWR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. URI leads Momentum by 35 points; URI leads Value by 17 points; PWR leads Risk Resilience by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PWR or URI?
Analyst price targets imply +29.9% upside for PWR and +18.2% for URI, so the Street currently favors PWR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors URI. 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, PWR or URI?
URI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. URI 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, PWR or URI?
PWR 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, PWR or URI?
URI on the Momentum factor, by 35 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, PWR or URI?
PWR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PWR 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 PWR more profitable than URI?
URI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 14.4% vs 37.1%; operating margin 6.2% vs 24.8%; ttm roe 14.9% vs 29.2%.
Is URI's lead over PWR getting stronger or weaker?
URI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-13, when URI moved ahead of PWR.
What would change the PWR vs URI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PWR closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to URI's edge; PWR's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; URI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 PWR and URI?
PWR: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. URI: 2 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 PWR is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On URI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PWR and URI 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.