SHAK vs WEN Stock Comparison
WEN currently leads SHAK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 54 vs 41. The clearest difference is value, while SHAK has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between SHAK and WEN?
WEN leads the current stock comparison as The Wendy's Company, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Shake Shack Inc. vs The Wendy's Company
WEN leads
WEN leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors SHAK on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support WEN, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Shake Shack Inc.
The Wendy's Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors WEN over SHAK, 54 versus 41 as of Oct 31, 2026. WEN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while SHAK holds the stronger risk resilience profile. WEN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors SHAK. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WEN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. WEN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Shake Shack Inc. and The Wendy's 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 SHAK and WEN 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.
- Value28 vs 67WEN +39
- Risk Resilience44 vs 28SHAK +16
- Quality42 vs 52WEN +10
- Momentum54 vs 56Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor WEN. WEN’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; SHAK keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
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 +14
New signals
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
WEN's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SHAK and WEN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
WEN (The Wendy's Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
SHAK (Shake Shack 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
WENWEN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SHAKSHAK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
WENWEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 39 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
SHAKSHAK on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
SHAKSHAK on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors WEN, analyst targets favor SHAK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | SHAK | WEN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13.7% | +12.3% | SHAK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +68.6% | +80.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 17 | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WEN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | WEN | 41 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | WENon balance | revenue growth 13.9% vs 5.5%; EPS growth 55.2% vs 41.7%; TTM ROE 7.5% vs 109%; gross margin 25.8% vs 27.2%; operating margin 4.5% vs 13.4% — WEN takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | WEN | Value 28 vs 67 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 7.8% vs 1.1%; vs 200-day -10.8% vs -4.1% |
| Risk Resilience | SHAK | Risk Resilience 44 vs 28 |
| Analyst expectations | SHAK | Target upside 13.7% vs 12.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SHAK and WEN 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 wide at 13 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)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 WEN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28WEN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- WEN +13
- 41 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- WEN +13
- 39 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- WEN +4
- 43 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- WEN +17
- 43 vs 60
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
Only SHAK
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only WEN
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
WEN 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.63%, AIQ +3 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 Value gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to WEN's edge.
- 2SHAK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3WEN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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
WEN leads on balance| Metric | SHAK | WEN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.9% | 5.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 55.2% | 41.7% |
| Gross margin | 25.8% | 27.2% |
| Operating margin | 4.5% | 13.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.5% | 109% |
| Debt to equity | 0.48 | 33.81 |
Performance
WEN leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SHAK | WEN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.9% | 12.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 14.6% | 10.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 6.6% | -3.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -33.2% | 4.6% |
| Year to date | -17.2% | -15.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -26.8% | -21.3% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | SHAK | WEN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 49.8 | 66.7 |
| ADX (14) | 22.2 | 28 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7.8% | 1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -10.8% | -4.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 42.4% | 65.8% |
Risk
SHAK is the more resilient| Metric | SHAK | WEN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.22 | 0.33 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.33 | -0.1 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.4 | -0.18 |
| Max drawdown | -50% | -33.1% |
| Current drawdown | -35.8% | -22.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 55.5% | 62.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.2% | -5.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SHAK or WEN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, WEN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 54 against SHAK's 41. The edge comes from value and quality. SHAK 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 SHAK or WEN the better buy right now?
WEN 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 WEN over SHAK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WEN leads Value by 39 points; SHAK leads Risk Resilience by 16 points; WEN leads Quality by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SHAK or WEN?
Analyst price targets imply +13.7% upside for SHAK and +12.3% for WEN, so the Street currently favors SHAK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors WEN. 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, SHAK or WEN?
WEN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. WEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 39 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, SHAK or WEN?
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 WEN?
The two are level on Momentum. 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 WEN?
SHAK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SHAK on Risk Resilience, by 16 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 WEN?
WEN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 25.8% vs 27.2%; operating margin 4.5% vs 13.4%; ttm roe 7.5% vs 109%.
Is WEN's lead over SHAK getting stronger or weaker?
WEN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the SHAK vs WEN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SHAK closes the Value gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to WEN's edge; SHAK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; WEN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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 WEN?
SHAK: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. WEN: 2 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 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 SHAK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On WEN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SHAK and WEN 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.