SHAK vs TXRH Stock Comparison
TXRH currently leads SHAK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 47 vs 41. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between SHAK and TXRH?
TXRH leads the current stock comparison as Texas Roadhouse, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Shake Shack Inc. vs Texas Roadhouse, Inc.
TXRH leads
TXRH leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from SHAK.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TXRH, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Shake Shack Inc.
Texas Roadhouse, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TXRH over SHAK, 47 versus 41 as of Oct 31, 2026. TXRH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. TXRH also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TXRH today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. TXRH lead: Reversed — SHAK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TXRH now leads by 6.
Compare Shake Shack Inc. and Texas Roadhouse, 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 SHAK and TXRH 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.
- Quality42 vs 54TXRH +12
- Risk Resilience44 vs 49TXRH +5
- Momentum54 vs 58TXRH +4
- Value28 vs 29Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TXRH. TXRH’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +13
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
TXRH's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SHAK and TXRH both carry a full feed there.
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
TXRHTXRH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SHAKSHAK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
TXRHTXRH on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
TXRHTXRH on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | SHAK | TXRH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13.7% | +14.1% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +68.6% | +28.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 17 | 16 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TXRH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TXRH | 41 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 13.9% vs 2.9%; TTM ROE 7.5% vs 27.6%; gross margin 25.8% vs 15.3%; operating margin 4.5% vs 8% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 28 vs 29 |
| Technicals | TXRH | Price vs 50-day 7.8% vs 4.3%; vs 200-day -10.8% vs -2.3% |
| Risk Resilience | TXRH | Risk Resilience 44 vs 49 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 13.7% vs 14.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SHAK and TXRH 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 moderate at 6 points.
- Only 3 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 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 TXRH.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28TXRH lead: Reversed — SHAK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TXRH now leads by 6.
- Today
- TXRH +6
- 41 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- TXRH +7
- 39 vs 46
- 30 sessions ago
- SHAK +1
- 43 vs 42
- 90 sessions ago
- TXRH +3
- 43 vs 46
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Oct 5 when SHAK moved ahead of TXRH.
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
Only SHAK
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.15%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only TXRH
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Death Cross Active.
TXRH 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 -0.04%, AIQ +3 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.24%, 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.
- 1SHAK closes the Quality gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to TXRH's edge.
- 2SHAK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TXRH's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
Split| Metric | SHAK | TXRH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.9% | 2.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 55.2% | -0.5% |
| Gross margin | 25.8% | 15.3% |
| Operating margin | 4.5% | 8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.5% | 27.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.48 | 0.7 |
Performance
TXRH leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SHAK | TXRH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.9% | 4.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 14.6% | 11.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 6.6% | -16.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -33.2% | 9.3% |
| Year to date | -17.2% | 5.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -26.8% | -0.5% |
Technicals
TXRH has the stronger structure| Metric | SHAK | TXRH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 49.8 | 63.6 |
| ADX (14) | 22.2 | 24.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7.8% | 4.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -10.8% | -2.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 42.4% | 32.9% |
Risk
TXRH is the more resilient| Metric | SHAK | TXRH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.22 | 0.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.33 | 0.07 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.4 | 0.13 |
| Max drawdown | -50% | -27.1% |
| Current drawdown | -35.8% | -18.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 55.5% | 31.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.2% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SHAK or TXRH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TXRH is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 47 against SHAK's 41. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 SHAK or TXRH the better buy right now?
TXRH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TXRH over SHAK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TXRH leads Quality by 12 points; TXRH leads Risk Resilience by 5 points; TXRH leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SHAK or TXRH?
Analyst price targets imply +13.7% upside for SHAK and +14.1% for TXRH. 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, SHAK or TXRH?
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, SHAK or TXRH?
SHAK 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, SHAK or TXRH?
TXRH on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, SHAK or TXRH?
TXRH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TXRH on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 SHAK more profitable than TXRH?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 25.8% vs 15.3%; operating margin 4.5% vs 8%; ttm roe 7.5% vs 27.6%. SHAK leads on one measure and TXRH on two measures, 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 TXRH's lead over SHAK getting stronger or weaker?
TXRH lead: Reversed — SHAK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TXRH now leads by 6. 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 2026-10-05, when SHAK moved ahead of TXRH.
What would change the SHAK vs TXRH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SHAK closes the Quality gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to TXRH's edge; SHAK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TXRH's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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 SHAK and TXRH?
SHAK: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. TXRH: 1 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 SHAK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TXRH it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SHAK and TXRH 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.