SOLV vs STE Stock Comparison
STE currently leads SOLV in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 63 vs 57. The clearest difference is momentum, while SOLV has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between SOLV and STE?
STE leads the current stock comparison as STERIS plc, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Solventum Corporation vs STERIS plc
STE leads
STE leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from SOLV.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support STE, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Solventum Corporation
STERIS plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors STE over SOLV, 63 versus 57 as of Oct 31, 2026. STE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while SOLV holds the stronger value profile. STE also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor STE today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. STE lead: Reversed — SOLV led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; STE now leads by 6.
Compare Solventum Corporation and STERIS plc 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 SOLV and STE 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.
- Momentum36 vs 83STE +47
- Value67 vs 48SOLV +19
- Risk Resilience55 vs 71STE +16
- Quality67 vs 57SOLV +10
4 of 6 evidence groups favor STE. STE’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; SOLV 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.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
STE's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SOLV and STE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
STE (STERIS plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
SOLV (Solventum Corporation): the counter-case, on value, quality, fundamentals.
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
STESTE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SOLVSOLV on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SOLVSOLV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 points.
Momentum
STESTE on the Momentum factor, by 47 points.
Lower downside
STESTE on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
STESTE 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 | SOLV | STE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.2% | +19.5% | STE has more room |
| Target dispersion | +77.4% | +2.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor STE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | STE | 57 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | SOLV | revenue growth 10.1% vs -6%; EPS growth 6.6% vs -8.5%; TTM ROE 29% vs 11.3%; gross margin 54.7% vs 44.4%; operating margin 25% vs 18.9% |
| Valuation | SOLV | Value 67 vs 48 |
| Technicals | STE | Price vs 50-day -7.9% vs 3.2%; vs 200-day 4.5% vs 1.7% |
| Risk Resilience | STE | Risk Resilience 55 vs 71 |
| Analyst expectations | STE | Target upside 11.2% vs 19.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SOLV and STE 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.
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 STE.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28STE lead: Reversed — SOLV led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; STE now leads by 6.
- Today
- STE +6
- 57 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- STE +5
- 59 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- SOLV +3
- 58 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- SOLV +9
- 68 vs 59
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Oct 12 when STE moved ahead of SOLV.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SOLV
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.74%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only STE
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.25%)
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
STE 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 down over the latest session (price -2.67%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.16%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1SOLV closes the Momentum gap — currently 47 points behind, the largest single contributor to STE's edge.
- 2SOLV's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3STE'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
SOLV leads on balance| Metric | SOLV | STE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.1% | -6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 6.6% | -8.5% |
| Gross margin | 54.7% | 44.4% |
| Operating margin | 25% | 18.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 29% | 11.3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.1 | 0.28 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | SOLV | STE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.6% | 3.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.1% | 8.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.7% | -1.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 23.1% | 7.6% |
| Year to date | 3.3% | -9.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 14.6% | -5% |
Technicals
STE has the stronger structure| Metric | SOLV | STE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.6 | 72 |
| ADX (14) | 18.3 | 32.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.9% | 3.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.5% | 1.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.5% | 25.3% |
Risk
STE is the more resilient| Metric | SOLV | STE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.56 | 0.4 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.5 | -0.23 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.8 | -0.34 |
| Max drawdown | -27.5% | -25.8% |
| Current drawdown | -11.5% | -14.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 30% | 26% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SOLV or STE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, STE is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 63 against SOLV's 57. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. SOLV 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 SOLV or STE the better buy right now?
STE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor STE over SOLV?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. STE leads Momentum by 47 points; SOLV leads Value by 19 points; STE leads Risk Resilience by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SOLV or STE?
Analyst price targets imply +11.2% upside for SOLV and +19.5% for STE, so the Street currently favors STE. 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, SOLV or STE?
SOLV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SOLV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 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, SOLV or STE?
SOLV 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, SOLV or STE?
STE on the Momentum factor, by 47 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, SOLV or STE?
STE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. STE 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 SOLV more profitable than STE?
SOLV leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 54.7% vs 44.4%; operating margin 25% vs 18.9%; ttm roe 29% vs 11.3%.
Is STE's lead over SOLV getting stronger or weaker?
STE lead: Reversed — SOLV led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; STE 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 once in that window, most recently on 2026-10-12, when STE moved ahead of SOLV.
What would change the SOLV vs STE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SOLV closes the Momentum gap — currently 47 points behind, the largest single contributor to STE's edge; SOLV's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; STE'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 SOLV and STE?
SOLV: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. STE: 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 SOLV is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On STE it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SOLV and STE 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.