SLB vs VLO Stock Comparison
VLO currently leads SLB in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 61 vs 45. The clearest difference is momentum, while SLB has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between SLB and VLO?
VLO leads the current stock comparison as Valero Energy Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Slb N.V. vs Valero Energy Corporation
VLO leads
VLO leads by 16 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value. Wall Street currently favors SLB on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support VLO, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Slb N.V.
Valero Energy Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VLO over SLB, 61 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. VLO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while SLB holds the stronger risk resilience profile. VLO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors SLB. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor VLO today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. VLO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 16 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Slb N.V. and Valero Energy Corporation 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 SLB and VLO 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.
- Momentum49 vs 74VLO +25
- Value38 vs 58VLO +20
- Quality42 vs 58VLO +16
- Risk Resilience59 vs 51SLB +8
4 of 6 evidence groups favor VLO. VLO’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; SLB 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 +11
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
VLO's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SLB and VLO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
VLO (Valero Energy Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
SLB (Slb N.V.): 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
VLOVLO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
VLOVLO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
VLOVLO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
VLOVLO on the Momentum factor, by 25 points.
Lower downside
SLBSLB on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
SLBSLB on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors VLO, analyst targets favor SLB. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | SLB | VLO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +24.3% | -16.7% | SLB has more room |
| Target dispersion | +37.8% | +72.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 12 | 9 | 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 | SLB | VLO |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 5.43% | 2.89% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.875 | $3.920 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.140 | $4.520 |
| Years increased | 4 | 3 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #307 |
SLB grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 5.43% a year against VLO's 2.89%. VLO never reduced its regular dividend in the window; SLB did in 1 year. They are ranked in different cohorts — variable-dividend payers and US dividend-paying corporations — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor VLO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | VLO | 45 vs 61 |
| Fundamentals | VLOon balance | revenue growth 2.9% vs 13.2%; EPS growth 6% vs 199.1%; TTM ROE 11.8% vs 29.9%; gross margin 16.5% vs 11.3%; operating margin 13.4% vs 7.5% — VLO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | VLO | Value 38 vs 58 |
| Technicals | VLO | Price vs 50-day -2.8% vs 12.9%; vs 200-day -2.3% vs 56.6% |
| Risk Resilience | SLB | Risk Resilience 59 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | SLB | Target upside 24.3% vs -16.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SLB and VLO 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 16 points. (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 VLO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20VLO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 16 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VLO +16
- 45 vs 61
- 7 sessions ago
- VLO +25
- 39 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- VLO +17
- 38 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- VLO +10
- 51 vs 61
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Aug 10 when VLO moved ahead of SLB.
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 / 1 neutral
Only SLB
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only VLO
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.81%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
VLO 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.24%, AIQ +3 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.77%, 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.
- 1SLB closes the Momentum gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to VLO's edge.
- 2SLB's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3VLO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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
VLO leads on balance| Metric | SLB | VLO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.9% | 13.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 6% | 199.1% |
| Gross margin | 16.5% | 11.3% |
| Operating margin | 13.4% | 7.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.8% | 29.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.49 | 0.45 |
Performance
VLO leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | SLB | VLO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.5% | -5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.1% | 14.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.8% | 39.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -5.3% | 85.7% |
| Year to date | 30.2% | 166.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 51.8% | 177.1% |
Technicals
VLO has the stronger structure| Metric | SLB | VLO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 57.8 | 68.4 |
| ADX (14) | 17.8 | 30.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.8% | 12.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.3% | 56.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 27.5% | 37.1% |
Risk
SLB is the more resilient| Metric | SLB | VLO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.72 | -0.4 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.25 | 2.79 |
| Sortino ratio | 2 | 4.69 |
| Max drawdown | -22.3% | -12.7% |
| Current drawdown | -16.8% | -5.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 36.3% | 37.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SLB or VLO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, VLO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 61 against SLB's 45. The edge comes from momentum and value. SLB 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 SLB or VLO the better buy right now?
VLO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 VLO over SLB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. VLO leads Momentum by 25 points; VLO leads Value by 20 points; VLO leads Quality by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SLB or VLO?
Analyst price targets imply +24.3% upside for SLB and -16.7% for VLO, so the Street currently favors SLB. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors VLO. 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, SLB or VLO?
VLO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. VLO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 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, SLB or VLO?
VLO 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, SLB or VLO?
VLO on the Momentum factor, by 25 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, SLB or VLO?
SLB is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SLB on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 SLB more profitable than VLO?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 16.5% vs 11.3%; operating margin 13.4% vs 7.5%; ttm roe 11.8% vs 29.9%. SLB leads on two measures and VLO on one measure, 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 VLO's lead over SLB getting stronger or weaker?
VLO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 16 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 once in that window, most recently on 2026-08-10, when VLO moved ahead of SLB.
What would change the SLB vs VLO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SLB closes the Momentum gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to VLO's edge; SLB's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; VLO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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 SLB and VLO?
SLB: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. VLO: 3 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 SLB is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On VLO it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare SLB and VLO 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.