ROP vs SON Stock Comparison
ROP currently leads SON in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 69 vs 44. The clearest difference is quality, while SON has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between ROP and SON?
ROP leads the current stock comparison as Roper Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Roper Technologies, Inc. vs Sonoco Products Company
ROP leads
ROP leads by 25 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors SON on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ROP, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Roper Technologies, Inc.
Sonoco Products Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ROP over SON, 69 versus 44 as of Oct 31, 2026. ROP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while SON holds the stronger value profile. ROP also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors SON. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ROP today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. ROP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 25 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Roper Technologies, Inc. and Sonoco Products 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 ROP and SON 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.
- Quality66 vs 15ROP +51
- Momentum95 vs 45ROP +50
- Value62 vs 68SON +6
- Risk Resilience46 vs 49Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ROP. ROP’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; SON 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.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
ROP's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ROP and SON both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ROP (Roper Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
SON (Sonoco Products Company): the counter-case, on value, valuation, 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
ROPROP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SONSON on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SONSON on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
ROPROP on the Momentum factor, by 50 points.
Lower downside
SONSON carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
SONSON on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ROP, analyst targets favor SON. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ROP | SON | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -2% | +16.8% | SON has more room |
| Target dispersion | +40.5% | +22.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 5 | 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 | ROP | SON |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 9.98% | 4.17% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.051 | $1.720 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $3.300 | $2.110 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #103 | #281 |
ROP grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 9.98% a year against SON's 4.17%. 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 ROP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ROP | 69 vs 44 |
| Fundamentals | ROPon balance | revenue growth 3% vs 8.3%; EPS growth -57.5% vs -8%; TTM ROE 13.5% vs -6.1%; gross margin 69.7% vs 20.2%; operating margin 28% vs -2.3% — ROP takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SON | Value 62 vs 68 |
| Technicals | ROP | Price vs 50-day 19.5% vs -2%; vs 200-day 20.8% vs -6.9% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 46 vs 49 |
| Analyst expectations | SON | Target upside -2% vs 16.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ROP and SON 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 25 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 ROP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28ROP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 25 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ROP +25
- 69 vs 44
- 7 sessions ago
- ROP +15
- 68 vs 53
- 30 sessions ago
- ROP +6
- 54 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- ROP +11
- 65 vs 54
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Sep 28 when SON moved ahead of ROP.
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.
5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only ROP
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.09%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SON
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.76%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
ROP 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 +3.77%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.14%, 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.
- 1SON closes the Quality gap — currently 51 points behind, the largest single contributor to ROP's edge.
- 2SON's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3ROP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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
ROP leads on balance| Metric | ROP | SON |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3% | 8.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -57.5% | -8% |
| Gross margin | 69.7% | 20.2% |
| Operating margin | 28% | -2.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.5% | -6.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.51 | 1.62 |
Performance
ROP leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ROP | SON |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 10.8% | -4.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 22.4% | -0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 13.2% | -14.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 23.8% | -0.8% |
| Year to date | -1.1% | 11.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -8.8% | 20.8% |
Technicals
ROP has the stronger structure| Metric | ROP | SON |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 91.4 | 53 |
| ADX (14) | 36.9 | 26 |
| Price vs 50-day | 19.5% | -2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 20.8% | -6.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 40.7% | 16.2% |
Risk
Split| Metric | ROP | SON |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.03 | 0.42 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.09 | 0.64 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.12 | 0.77 |
| Max drawdown | -30.8% | -21.2% |
| Current drawdown | -3.4% | -19.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 30.9% | 32.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -2.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ROP or SON?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ROP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 69 against SON's 44. The edge comes from quality and momentum. SON 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 ROP or SON the better buy right now?
ROP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 ROP over SON?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ROP leads Quality by 51 points; ROP leads Momentum by 50 points; SON leads Value by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ROP or SON?
Analyst price targets imply -2% upside for ROP and +16.8% for SON, so the Street currently favors SON. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ROP. 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, ROP or SON?
SON is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SON on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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, ROP or SON?
SON 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, ROP or SON?
ROP on the Momentum factor, by 50 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, ROP or SON?
SON is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SON carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ROP more profitable than SON?
ROP leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 69.7% vs 20.2%; operating margin 28% vs -2.3%; ttm roe 13.5% vs -6.1%.
Is ROP's lead over SON getting stronger or weaker?
ROP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 25 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-28, when SON moved ahead of ROP.
What would change the ROP vs SON verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SON closes the Quality gap — currently 51 points behind, the largest single contributor to ROP's edge; SON's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; ROP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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 ROP and SON?
ROP: 5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. SON: 1 bullish / 2 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 ROP is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SON it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ROP and SON 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.