VALE vs WY Stock Comparison
Compare VALE and WY across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between VALE and WY?
VALE leads the current stock comparison as Vale S.A., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Vale S.A. vs Weyerhaeuser Company
VALE leads
VALE leads by 18 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from WY. Wall Street currently favors WY on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support VALE, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Vale S.A.
Weyerhaeuser Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VALE over WY, 56 versus 38 as of Sep 11, 2026. VALE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while WY holds the stronger risk resilience profile. VALE also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors WY. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor VALE today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. VALE lead: Reversed — WY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VALE now leads by 18.
Compare Vale S.A. and Weyerhaeuser 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 VALE and WY 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.
- Momentum75 vs 24VALE +51
- Risk Resilience50 vs 67WY +17
- Value57 vs 41VALE +16
- Quality42 vs 32VALE +10
4 of 6 evidence groups favor VALE. VALE’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; WY keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 -4
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
VALE's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — VALE and WY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
VALE (Vale S.A.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
WY (Weyerhaeuser Company): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
VALEVALE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WYWY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
VALEVALE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 points.
Momentum
VALEVALE on the Momentum factor, by 51 points.
Lower downside
WYWY on Risk Resilience, by 17 points.
Analyst upside
WYWY on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors VALE, analyst targets favor WY. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | VALE | WY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13.3% | +31.5% | WY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.1% | +6.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 2 | 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 VALE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | VALE | 56 vs 38 |
| Fundamentals | VALEon balance | revenue growth 13.3% vs 8.1%; EPS growth -27.3% vs 4.5%; TTM ROE 5.8% vs 5%; gross margin 34.2% vs 13.2%; operating margin 26.1% vs 8.4% — VALE takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | VALE | Value 57 vs 41 |
| Technicals | VALE | Price vs 50-day 3.6% vs -8.1%; vs 200-day 0.4% vs -7.1% |
| Risk Resilience | WY | Risk Resilience 50 vs 67 |
| Analyst expectations | WY | Target upside 13.3% vs 31.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of VALE and WY 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 wide at 18 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 VALE.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10VALE lead: Reversed — WY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VALE now leads by 18.
- Today
- VALE +18
- 56 vs 38
- 7 sessions ago
- VALE +18
- 57 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- WY +3
- 45 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- VALE +7
- 46 vs 39
The lead changed hands 13 times in this window, most recently on Aug 20 when VALE moved ahead of WY.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.56%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
2 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.16%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
VALE 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.33%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.32%, 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.
- 1WY closes the Momentum gap — currently 51 points behind, the largest single contributor to VALE's edge.
- 2WY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3VALE'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
VALE leads on balance| Metric | VALE | WY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.3% | 8.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -27.3% | 4.5% |
| Gross margin | 34.2% | 13.2% |
| Operating margin | 26.1% | 8.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 5.8% | 5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 0.57 |
Performance
VALE leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | VALE | WY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.9% | -5.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 6% | -11.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2.3% | -9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -0.4% | -5.3% |
| Year to date | 17.3% | -7.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 46.2% | -15.1% |
Technicals
VALE has the stronger structure| Metric | VALE | WY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 65.3 | 14.2 |
| ADX (14) | 16.3 | 27.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3.6% | -8.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.4% | -7.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.9% | 22.2% |
Risk
WY is the more resilient| Metric | VALE | WY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.13 | 0.32 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.24 | -0.54 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.78 | -0.98 |
| Max drawdown | -23.5% | -18.9% |
| Current drawdown | -14.3% | -18.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.9% | 26.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, VALE or WY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, VALE is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 56 against WY's 38. The edge comes from momentum and value. WY is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 VALE or WY the better buy right now?
VALE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor VALE over WY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. VALE leads Momentum by 51 points; WY leads Risk Resilience by 17 points; VALE leads Value by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, VALE or WY?
Analyst price targets imply +13.3% upside for VALE and +31.5% for WY, so the Street currently favors WY. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors VALE. 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, VALE or WY?
VALE is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. VALE 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, VALE or WY?
WY 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, VALE or WY?
VALE on the Momentum factor, by 51 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, VALE or WY?
WY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WY on Risk Resilience, by 17 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 VALE more profitable than WY?
VALE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 34.2% vs 13.2%; operating margin 26.1% vs 8.4%; ttm roe 5.8% vs 5%.
Is VALE's lead over WY getting stronger or weaker?
VALE lead: Reversed — WY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VALE now leads by 18. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 13 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-20, when VALE moved ahead of WY.
What would change the VALE vs WY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: WY closes the Momentum gap — currently 51 points behind, the largest single contributor to VALE's edge; WY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; VALE'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 VALE and WY?
VALE: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WY: 2 bullish / 4 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 VALE is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On WY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare VALE and WY 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.