TX vs WOR Stock Comparison
WOR currently leads TX in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 64 vs 52. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between TX and WOR?
WOR leads the current stock comparison as Worthington Industries, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Ternium S.A. vs Worthington Industries, Inc.
WOR leads
WOR leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support WOR, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Ternium S.A.
Worthington Industries, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors WOR over TX, 64 versus 52 as of Oct 31, 2026. WOR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality. WOR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WOR today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. WOR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Ternium S.A. and Worthington Industries, 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 TX and WOR 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.
- Momentum40 vs 70WOR +30
- Quality40 vs 53WOR +13
- Risk Resilience66 vs 72WOR +6
- Value67 vs 65Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor WOR. WOR’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality.
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 -2, 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.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
WOR's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TX and WOR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
WOR (Worthington Industries, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
TX (Ternium S.A.): the counter-case, on fundamentals — but at materially higher volatility, 37.3% against 21.9%.
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
WORWOR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TXTX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
WORWOR on the Momentum factor, by 30 points.
Lower downside
WORWOR on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
WORWOR 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 | TX | WOR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +8.3% | +15.3% | WOR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +35% | +11.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 2 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | TX | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 17.61% | -5.98% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.200 | $0.980 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.700 | $0.720 |
| Years increased | 3 | 4 |
| No cut in window | No (2) | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
TX grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 17.61% a year against WOR's -5.98%.
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 WOR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | WOR | 52 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | TXon balance | revenue growth 10.3% vs -1.9%; EPS growth 63.6% vs 6.5%; TTM ROE 5.8% vs 15.8%; gross margin 17.4% vs 27.3%; operating margin 7.5% vs 6% — TX takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 67 vs 65 |
| Technicals | WOR | Price vs 50-day -6.5% vs 4.1%; vs 200-day 13.5% vs 12.9% |
| Risk Resilience | WOR | Risk Resilience 66 vs 72 |
| Analyst expectations | WOR | Target upside 8.3% vs 15.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TX and WOR 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 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 WOR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28WOR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- WOR +12
- 52 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- WOR +11
- 53 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- WOR +3
- 57 vs 60
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 62 vs 62
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 25 when WOR moved ahead of TX.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only WOR
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
WOR 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 -2.39%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.3%, 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.
- 1TX closes the Momentum gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to WOR's edge.
- 2TX's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3WOR'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
TX leads on balance| Metric | TX | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.3% | -1.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 63.6% | 6.5% |
| Gross margin | 17.4% | 27.3% |
| Operating margin | 7.5% | 6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 5.8% | 15.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.24 | 0.34 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | TX | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -8.5% | -2.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.7% | 6.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 9.8% | 14.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 26.1% | 18.1% |
| Year to date | 41.2% | 23.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 50.1% | 8.6% |
Technicals
WOR has the stronger structure| Metric | TX | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 42.1 | 61 |
| ADX (14) | 23.4 | 31.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.5% | 4.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 13.5% | 12.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.3% | 21.9% |
Risk
WOR is the more resilient| Metric | TX | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.02 | 0.89 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.14 | 0.45 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.9 | 0.66 |
| Max drawdown | -18.9% | -20.5% |
| Current drawdown | -9.7% | -2.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.1% | 30% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TX or WOR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, WOR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 64 against TX's 52. The edge comes from momentum and quality. 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 TX or WOR the better buy right now?
WOR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 WOR over TX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WOR leads Momentum by 30 points; WOR leads Quality by 13 points; WOR leads Risk Resilience by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TX or WOR?
Analyst price targets imply +8.3% upside for TX and +15.3% for WOR, so the Street currently favors WOR. 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, TX or WOR?
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, TX or WOR?
TX 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, TX or WOR?
WOR on the Momentum factor, by 30 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, TX or WOR?
WOR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WOR on Risk Resilience, by 6 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 TX more profitable than WOR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 17.4% vs 27.3%; operating margin 7.5% vs 6%; ttm roe 5.8% vs 15.8%. TX leads on one measure and WOR 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 WOR's lead over TX getting stronger or weaker?
WOR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 12 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-25, when WOR moved ahead of TX.
What would change the TX vs WOR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TX closes the Momentum gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to WOR's edge; TX's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; WOR'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 TX and WOR?
TX: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WOR: 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 TX is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On WOR it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare TX and WOR 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.