TRV vs WTW Stock Comparison
Compare TRV and WTW across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between TRV and WTW?
TRV leads the current stock comparison as The Travelers Companies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
The Travelers Companies, Inc. vs Willis Towers Watson Public Limited Company
TRV leads
TRV leads by 21 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 5 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors WTW on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TRV, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The Travelers Companies, Inc.
Willis Towers Watson Public Limited Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TRV over WTW, 63 versus 42 as of Sep 11, 2026. TRV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value. TRV also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors WTW. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TRV today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. TRV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 21 points over 30 sessions.
Compare The Travelers Companies, Inc. and Willis Towers Watson Public Limited Company 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 TRV and WTW 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.
- Momentum62 vs 18TRV +44
- Value63 vs 38TRV +25
- Quality67 vs 60TRV +7
- Risk Resilience55 vs 52Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TRV. TRV’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value.
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 -2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No new signals fired.
TRV's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TRV and WTW both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TRV (The Travelers Companies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
WTW (Willis Towers Watson Public Limited Company): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 27.3% against 16.3%.
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
TRVTRV on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TRVTRV on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TRVTRV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 points.
Momentum
TRVTRV on the Momentum factor, by 44 points.
Lower downside
TRVTRV carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
WTWWTW on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TRV, analyst targets favor WTW. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TRV | WTW | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -7.2% | +10% | WTW has more room |
| Target dispersion | +40.2% | +37.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TRV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TRV | 63 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 1.9% vs 2.2%; EPS growth 31.9% vs -22.1%; TTM ROE 25.6% vs 20%; gross margin 34.7% vs 53.8%; operating margin 21.3% vs 22.2% |
| Valuation | TRV | Value 63 vs 38 |
| Technicals | TRV | Price vs 50-day 2.7% vs -1.2%; vs 200-day 17.2% vs 5.1% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 55 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | WTW | Target upside -7.2% vs 10% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TRV and WTW 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 21 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)
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 TRV.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TRV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 21 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TRV +21
- 63 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- TRV +12
- 64 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- TRV +5
- 55 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- TRV +10
- 69 vs 59
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 17 when TRV moved ahead of WTW.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (16.50%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
3 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.34%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
TRV 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 +2.08%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.06%, 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.
- 1WTW closes the Momentum gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to TRV's edge.
- 2WTW's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3TRV'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
Split| Metric | TRV | WTW |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.9% | 2.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 31.9% | -22.1% |
| Gross margin | 34.7% | 53.8% |
| Operating margin | 21.3% | 22.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 25.6% | 20% |
| Debt to equity | 0.27 | 0.92 |
Performance
TRV leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | TRV | WTW |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.4% | -6.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.7% | -7.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 21.2% | 19.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 22.8% | 8.8% |
| Year to date | 26.7% | -4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 33.9% | -5.1% |
Technicals
TRV has the stronger structure| Metric | TRV | WTW |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.9 | 32.1 |
| ADX (14) | 14.2 | 30 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.7% | -1.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 17.2% | 5.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 16.3% | 27.3% |
Risk
Split| Metric | TRV | WTW |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.1 | -0.11 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.34 | -0.12 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.28 | -0.14 |
| Max drawdown | -8.8% | -30.8% |
| Current drawdown | -7.5% | -10.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 20.9% | 30.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TRV or WTW?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TRV is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 63 against WTW's 42. The edge comes from momentum and value. 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 TRV or WTW the better buy right now?
TRV carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 TRV over WTW?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TRV leads Momentum by 44 points; TRV leads Value by 25 points; TRV leads Quality by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TRV or WTW?
Analyst price targets imply -7.2% upside for TRV and +10% for WTW, so the Street currently favors WTW. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TRV. 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, TRV or WTW?
TRV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TRV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 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, TRV or WTW?
TRV 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, TRV or WTW?
TRV on the Momentum factor, by 44 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, TRV or WTW?
TRV is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TRV carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is TRV more profitable than WTW?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 34.7% vs 53.8%; operating margin 21.3% vs 22.2%; ttm roe 25.6% vs 20%. TRV leads on one measure and WTW 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 TRV's lead over WTW getting stronger or weaker?
TRV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 21 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-17, when TRV moved ahead of WTW.
What would change the TRV vs WTW verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: WTW closes the Momentum gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to TRV's edge; WTW's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; TRV'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 TRV and WTW?
TRV: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. WTW: 3 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 TRV is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On WTW it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare TRV and WTW 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.