ROK vs SWK Stock Comparison
Compare ROK and SWK across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ROK and SWK?
ROK leads the current stock comparison as Rockwell Automation, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Rockwell Automation, Inc. vs Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.
ROK leads
ROK leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from SWK.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support ROK, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Rockwell Automation, Inc.
Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ROK over SWK, 50 versus 48 as of Sep 11, 2026. ROK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while SWK holds the stronger value profile. ROK also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ROK today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. ROK lead: Reversed — SWK led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ROK now leads by 2.
Compare Rockwell Automation, Inc. and Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. 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 ROK and SWK 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.
- Quality72 vs 43ROK +29
- Value38 vs 65SWK +27
- Momentum36 vs 28ROK +8
- Risk Resilience54 vs 60SWK +6
2 of 6 evidence groups favor ROK. ROK’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; SWK keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -10
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
No new signals fired.
ROK's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ROK and SWK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ROK (Rockwell Automation, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
SWK (Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 25.1% against 18.6%.
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
ROKROK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ROKROK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SWKSWK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 points.
Momentum
ROKROK on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
SWKSWK on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
ROKROK 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 | ROK | SWK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16.9% | -1.6% | ROK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +20% | +15.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 3 | 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 ROK. 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 | 50 vs 48 |
| Fundamentals | ROK | revenue growth 3.3% vs 3%; EPS growth 17% vs 4.9%; TTM ROE 33.3% vs 6.9%; gross margin 54.5% vs 31.7%; operating margin 21.7% vs 8.3% |
| Valuation | SWK | Value 38 vs 65 |
| Technicals | SWK | Price vs 50-day -4.9% vs -6.1%; vs 200-day 0% vs 8.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SWK | Risk Resilience 54 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | ROK | Target upside 16.9% vs -1.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ROK and SWK 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 2 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'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 ROK.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ROK lead: Reversed — SWK led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ROK now leads by 2.
- Today
- ROK +2
- 50 vs 48
- 7 sessions ago
- SWK +3
- 52 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- SWK +12
- 46 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- SWK +3
- 54 vs 57
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Sep 8 when ROK moved ahead of SWK.
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 / 0 bearish
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.85%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (15.39%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
SWK 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.67%, AIQ -3 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.01%, 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.
- 1SWK closes the Quality gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to ROK's edge.
- 2SWK's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3ROK'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
ROK leads on balance| Metric | ROK | SWK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.3% | 3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 17% | 4.9% |
| Gross margin | 54.5% | 31.7% |
| Operating margin | 21.7% | 8.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 33.3% | 6.9% |
| Debt to equity | 1.03 | 0.53 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ROK | SWK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.9% | -7.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6.7% | -13.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.2% | 15.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 12.9% | 21% |
| Year to date | 8.3% | 20.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 22.3% | 15.5% |
Technicals
SWK has the stronger structure| Metric | ROK | SWK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 41.8 | 27.1 |
| ADX (14) | 27 | 19.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.9% | -6.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0% | 8.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.6% | 25.1% |
Risk
SWK is the more resilient| Metric | ROK | SWK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.4 | 1.57 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.7 | 0.48 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.06 | 0.86 |
| Max drawdown | -19% | -26.9% |
| Current drawdown | -14.9% | -14.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 31% | 37.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -3.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ROK or SWK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ROK is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 50 against SWK's 48. The edge comes from quality and momentum. SWK 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 ROK or SWK the better buy right now?
ROK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ROK over SWK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ROK leads Quality by 29 points; SWK leads Value by 27 points; ROK leads Momentum by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ROK or SWK?
Analyst price targets imply +16.9% upside for ROK and -1.6% for SWK, so the Street currently favors ROK. 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, ROK or SWK?
SWK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SWK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 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, ROK or SWK?
ROK 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, ROK or SWK?
ROK on the Momentum factor, by 8 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, ROK or SWK?
SWK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SWK on Risk Resilience, by 6 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 ROK more profitable than SWK?
ROK leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 54.5% vs 31.7%; operating margin 21.7% vs 8.3%; ttm roe 33.3% vs 6.9%.
Is ROK's lead over SWK getting stronger or weaker?
ROK lead: Reversed — SWK led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ROK now leads by 2. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-08, when ROK moved ahead of SWK.
What would change the ROK vs SWK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SWK closes the Quality gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to ROK's edge; SWK's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; ROK'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 ROK and SWK?
ROK: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. SWK: 3 bullish / 2 bearish, 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 ROK is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SWK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ROK and SWK 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.