UA vs URBN Stock Comparison
URBN currently leads UA in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 65 vs 45. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between UA and URBN?
URBN leads the current stock comparison as Urban Outfitters, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Under Armour, Inc. vs Urban Outfitters, Inc.
URBN leads
URBN leads by 20 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors UA on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support URBN, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Under Armour, Inc.
Urban Outfitters, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors URBN over UA, 65 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. URBN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum. URBN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors UA. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor URBN today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. URBN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 20 points over 30 sessions. URBN leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare Under Armour, Inc. and Urban Outfitters, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare UA and URBN 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.
- Quality37 vs 61URBN +24
- Momentum58 vs 81URBN +23
- Value42 vs 58URBN +16
- Risk Resilience47 vs 62URBN +15
5 of 6 evidence groups favor URBN. URBN’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
URBN's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — UA and URBN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
URBN (Urban Outfitters, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
UA (Under Armour, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 34.5% against 21.7%.
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
URBNURBN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
URBNURBN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
URBNURBN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 points.
Momentum
URBNURBN on the Momentum factor, by 23 points.
Lower downside
URBNURBN on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
UAUA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors URBN, analyst targets favor UA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | UA | URBN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20.4% | +0.3% | UA has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +32.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor URBN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | URBN | 45 vs 65 |
| Fundamentals | URBNon balance | revenue growth -6.3% vs 12.2%; EPS growth 101.3% vs 112.9%; TTM ROE -32.1% vs 20.7%; gross margin 47% vs 37.5% — URBN takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | URBN | Value 42 vs 58 |
| Technicals | URBN | Price vs 50-day -5.3% vs 10.4%; vs 200-day -18.3% vs 20.2% |
| Risk Resilience | URBN | Risk Resilience 47 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | UA | Target upside 20.4% vs 0.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of UA and URBN and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 20 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 URBN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20URBN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 20 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- URBN +20
- 45 vs 65
- 7 sessions ago
- URBN +20
- 45 vs 65
- 30 sessions ago
- URBN +18
- 37 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- URBN +24
- 35 vs 59
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jul 13 when URBN moved ahead of UA.
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 / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only UA
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (20.63%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.72%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
6 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only URBN
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.47%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.6%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: RSI Overbought, MACD Bullish Crossover.
URBN 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 -3.99%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.41%, 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.
- 1UA closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to URBN's edge.
- 2UA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3URBN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 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
URBN leads on balance| Metric | UA | URBN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -6.3% | 12.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 101.3% | 112.9% |
| Gross margin | 47% | 37.5% |
| Operating margin | 0.3% | 11.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -32.1% | 20.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.96 | 0.43 |
Performance
URBN leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | UA | URBN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0% | 2.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.8% | 16.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -32.8% | 18.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -26.9% | 16.9% |
| Year to date | -0.8% | 14.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 3% | 29.3% |
Technicals
URBN has the stronger structure| Metric | UA | URBN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 70.7 | 82.9 |
| ADX (14) | 19.2 | 33 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.3% | 10.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -18.3% | 20.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 34.5% | 21.7% |
Risk
URBN is the more resilient| Metric | UA | URBN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.32 | 0.92 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.25 | 0.75 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.37 | 1.29 |
| Max drawdown | -46.5% | -26.3% |
| Current drawdown | -39.6% | -0.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 52.9% | 42.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5% | -3.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, UA or URBN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, URBN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 65 against UA's 45. The edge comes from quality and momentum. 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 UA or URBN the better buy right now?
URBN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor URBN over UA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. URBN leads Quality by 24 points; URBN leads Momentum by 23 points; URBN leads Value by 16 points. URBN leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by UA simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, UA or URBN?
Analyst price targets imply +20.4% upside for UA and +0.3% for URBN, so the Street currently favors UA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors URBN. 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, UA or URBN?
URBN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. URBN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 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, UA or URBN?
URBN 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, UA or URBN?
URBN on the Momentum factor, by 23 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, UA or URBN?
URBN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. URBN on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 UA more profitable than URBN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 47% vs 37.5%; operating margin 0.3% vs 11.3%; ttm roe -32.1% vs 20.7%. 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 URBN's lead over UA getting stronger or weaker?
URBN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 20 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-13, when URBN moved ahead of UA.
What would change the UA vs URBN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: UA closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to URBN's edge; UA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; URBN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 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 UA and URBN?
UA: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. URBN: 6 bullish / 1 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 UA is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On URBN it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare UA and URBN 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.