TSCO vs UAA Stock Comparison
TSCO currently leads UAA in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 44. The clearest difference is quality, while UAA has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between TSCO and UAA?
TSCO leads the current stock comparison as Tractor Supply Company, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Tractor Supply Company vs Under Armour, Inc.
TSCO leads
TSCO leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value. Wall Street currently favors UAA on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support TSCO, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Tractor Supply Company
Under Armour, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TSCO over UAA, 52 versus 44 as of Oct 21, 2026. TSCO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while UAA holds the stronger momentum profile. TSCO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors UAA. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TSCO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. TSCO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Tractor Supply Company and Under Armour, Inc. 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 TSCO and UAA 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.
- Quality54 vs 37TSCO +17
- Value52 vs 42TSCO +10
- Momentum53 vs 57UAA +4
- Risk Resilience46 vs 43Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor TSCO. TSCO’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; UAA keeps a meaningful momentum 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 +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
TSCO's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TSCO and UAA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TSCO (Tractor Supply Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
UAA (Under Armour, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 38.9% against 28.1%.
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
TSCOTSCO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TSCOTSCO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TSCOTSCO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
UAAUAA on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
TSCOTSCO carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
UAAUAA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TSCO, analyst targets favor UAA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TSCO | UAA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.8% | +35.1% | UAA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +60.2% | +95.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 7 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TSCO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TSCO | 52 vs 44 |
| Fundamentals | TSCOon balance | revenue growth 26.4% vs -6.3%; EPS growth 122.6% vs 101.3%; TTM ROE 39.3% vs -32.1%; gross margin 32.5% vs 47% — TSCO takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | TSCO | Value 52 vs 42 |
| Technicals | TSCO | Price vs 50-day -2.9% vs -5.6%; vs 200-day -15.2% vs -18.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 46 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | UAA | Target upside 11.8% vs 35.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TSCO and UAA 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 8 points.
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 TSCO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TSCO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TSCO +8
- 52 vs 44
- 7 sessions ago
- TSCO +6
- 51 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- TSCO +9
- 45 vs 36
- 90 sessions ago
- TSCO +22
- 57 vs 35
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Jul 23 when TSCO moved ahead of UAA.
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.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only TSCO
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only UAA
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.97%)
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
TSCO 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.67%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -4.3%, 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.
- 1UAA closes the Quality gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSCO's edge.
- 2UAA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TSCO'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
TSCO leads on balance| Metric | TSCO | UAA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 26.4% | -6.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 122.6% | 101.3% |
| Gross margin | 32.5% | 47% |
| Operating margin | 8.9% | 0.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 39.3% | -32.1% |
| Debt to equity | 2.49 | 0.96 |
Performance
UAA leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | TSCO | UAA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.3% | -0.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.2% | 3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 12.1% | -32.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.8% | -27.5% |
| Year to date | -34.2% | -1.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -40.3% | 2.5% |
Technicals
TSCO has the stronger structure| Metric | TSCO | UAA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.6 | 68.8 |
| ADX (14) | 18.6 | 19.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.9% | -5.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -15.2% | -18.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.1% | 38.9% |
Risk
Split| Metric | TSCO | UAA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.41 | 1.33 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.54 | 0.23 |
| Sortino ratio | -2.05 | 0.34 |
| Max drawdown | -48.3% | -47.5% |
| Current drawdown | -41.6% | -40% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.8% | 53.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -4.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TSCO or UAA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TSCO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 52 against UAA's 44. The edge comes from quality and value. UAA 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 TSCO or UAA the better buy right now?
TSCO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TSCO over UAA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TSCO leads Quality by 17 points; TSCO leads Value by 10 points; UAA leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TSCO or UAA?
Analyst price targets imply +11.8% upside for TSCO and +35.1% for UAA, so the Street currently favors UAA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TSCO. 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, TSCO or UAA?
TSCO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TSCO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, TSCO or UAA?
TSCO 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, TSCO or UAA?
UAA on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, TSCO or UAA?
TSCO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSCO 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 TSCO more profitable than UAA?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 32.5% vs 47%; operating margin 8.9% vs 0.3%; ttm roe 39.3% vs -32.1%. Each name leads 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 TSCO's lead over UAA getting stronger or weaker?
TSCO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 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 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-23, when TSCO moved ahead of UAA.
What would change the TSCO vs UAA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: UAA closes the Quality gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSCO's edge; UAA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TSCO'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 TSCO and UAA?
TSCO: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. UAA: 1 bullish / 2 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 TSCO is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On UAA it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare TSCO and UAA 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.