STAG vs TRNO Stock Comparison
Compare STAG and TRNO across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between STAG and TRNO?
TRNO leads the current stock comparison as Terreno Realty Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
STAG Industrial, Inc. vs Terreno Realty Corporation
TRNO leads
TRNO leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors STAG on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support TRNO, and its current signal state is conflicted.
STAG Industrial, Inc.
Terreno Realty Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TRNO over STAG, 51 versus 49 as of Sep 11, 2026. TRNO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while STAG holds the stronger momentum profile. TRNO also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors STAG. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TRNO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. TRNO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare STAG Industrial, Inc. and Terreno Realty Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare STAG and TRNO 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 31STAG +18
- Quality50 vs 65TRNO +15
- Risk Resilience64 vs 72TRNO +8
- Value39 vs 42Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor TRNO. TRNO’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; STAG keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
TRNO's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — STAG and TRNO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TRNO (Terreno Realty Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
STAG (STAG Industrial, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, 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
TRNOTRNO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
STAGSTAG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
STAGSTAG on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
TRNOTRNO on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
STAGSTAG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TRNO, analyst targets favor STAG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | STAG | TRNO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +48.1% | +12.7% | STAG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +181.8% | +42.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 11 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TRNO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 49 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | TRNOon balance | revenue growth 0.1% vs 0.2%; EPS growth -12.5% vs -18.2%; TTM ROE 6.9% vs 9.2%; gross margin 62% vs 64.4%; operating margin 37.6% vs 41.4% — TRNO takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 39 vs 42 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -3.2% vs -5.8%; vs 200-day -3.3% vs 0.4% |
| Risk Resilience | TRNO | Risk Resilience 64 vs 72 |
| Analyst expectations | STAG | Target upside 48.1% vs 12.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of STAG and TRNO 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 narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 TRNO.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TRNO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TRNO +2
- 49 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 51 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- TRNO +3
- 44 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- TRNO +2
- 54 vs 56
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 3 when STAG moved ahead of TRNO.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.55%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.60%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
TRNO 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.73%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.38%, 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.
- 1STAG closes the Quality gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to TRNO's edge.
- 2STAG's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3TRNO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
TRNO leads on balance| Metric | STAG | TRNO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.1% | 0.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -12.5% | -18.2% |
| Gross margin | 62% | 64.4% |
| Operating margin | 37.6% | 41.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 6.9% | 9.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.96 | 0.24 |
Performance
TRNO leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | STAG | TRNO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.5% | -1.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.2% | -5.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2.9% | -1.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -3.8% | 3.7% |
| Year to date | 0.3% | 10.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 0.7% | 10.7% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | STAG | TRNO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 58.8 | 23 |
| ADX (14) | 18.9 | 20.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.2% | -5.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.3% | 0.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 9.8% | 10.3% |
Risk
TRNO is the more resilient| Metric | STAG | TRNO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.33 | 0.42 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0 | 0.5 |
| Sortino ratio | 0 | 0.8 |
| Max drawdown | -13.5% | -13.4% |
| Current drawdown | -12.3% | -13.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 19.4% | 20.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -1.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, STAG or TRNO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TRNO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 51 against STAG's 49. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. STAG is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 STAG or TRNO the better buy right now?
TRNO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TRNO over STAG?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. STAG leads Momentum by 18 points; TRNO leads Quality by 15 points; TRNO leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, STAG or TRNO?
Analyst price targets imply +48.1% upside for STAG and +12.7% for TRNO, so the Street currently favors STAG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TRNO. 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, STAG or TRNO?
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, STAG or TRNO?
STAG 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, STAG or TRNO?
STAG on the Momentum factor, by 18 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, STAG or TRNO?
TRNO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TRNO 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 STAG more profitable than TRNO?
TRNO leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 62% vs 64.4%; operating margin 37.6% vs 41.4%; ttm roe 6.9% vs 9.2%.
Is TRNO's lead over STAG getting stronger or weaker?
TRNO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-03, when STAG moved ahead of TRNO.
What would change the STAG vs TRNO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: STAG closes the Quality gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to TRNO's edge; STAG's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; TRNO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 STAG and TRNO?
STAG: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. TRNO: 2 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 STAG is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TRNO it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare STAG and TRNO 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.