VALE vs WY Stock Comparison
VALE currently leads WY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 43 vs 42. The clearest difference is value, while WY has the stronger momentum profile.
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 value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Vale S.A. vs Weyerhaeuser Company
VALE leads
VALE leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 6 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support VALE, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Vale S.A.
Weyerhaeuser Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VALE over WY, 43 versus 42 as of Oct 31, 2026. VALE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while WY holds the stronger momentum profile. VALE also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor VALE today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. VALE lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Vale S.A. and Weyerhaeuser Company 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 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.
- Momentum25 vs 42WY +17
- Value57 vs 41VALE +16
- Risk Resilience49 vs 64WY +15
- Quality42 vs 32VALE +10
3 of 6 evidence groups favor VALE. VALE’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; WY keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -9
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
VALE's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
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 value and quality.
WY (Weyerhaeuser Company): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, technicals.
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
WYWY on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
WYWY on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
VALEVALE 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 | VALE | WY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +41.4% | +39.2% | VALE has more room |
| Target dispersion | +40.4% | +17.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 3 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 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 | Even | 43 vs 42 |
| 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 | WY | Price vs 50-day -18.5% vs -3.3%; vs 200-day -22.5% vs -19.1% |
| Risk Resilience | WY | Risk Resilience 49 vs 64 |
| Analyst expectations | VALE | Target upside 41.4% vs 39.2% |
✓ 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 narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28VALE lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VALE +1
- 43 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- WY +1
- 44 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- VALE +6
- 44 vs 38
- 90 sessions ago
- VALE +16
- 54 vs 38
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Oct 22 when WY moved ahead of VALE.
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 / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only VALE
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only WY
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active.
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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.88%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +3.04%, AIQ -2 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 Value gap — currently 16 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 4 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate VALE's advantage entirely.
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
WY leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | VALE | WY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -9.7% | 1.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.9% | 0.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -19.7% | -18.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -27.6% | -20.9% |
| Year to date | -6.2% | -19% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 2.1% | -19.7% |
Technicals
WY has the stronger structure| Metric | VALE | WY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 16.8 | 50.3 |
| ADX (14) | 30.8 | 38.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -18.5% | -3.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -22.5% | -19.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.4% | 27.9% |
Risk
WY is the more resilient| Metric | VALE | WY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.13 | 0.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.02 | -0.78 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.02 | -1.43 |
| Max drawdown | -35.6% | -31.9% |
| Current drawdown | -35.6% | -29.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 34% | 27.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4% | -2.6% |
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 Oct 31, 2026, scoring 43 against WY's 42. The edge comes from value and quality. WY 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 VALE or WY the better buy right now?
VALE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor VALE over WY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WY leads Momentum by 17 points; VALE leads Value by 16 points; WY leads Risk Resilience by 15 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 +41.4% upside for VALE and +39.2% for WY, so the Street currently favors VALE. 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, 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?
WY on the Momentum factor, by 17 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 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 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: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-22, when WY moved ahead of VALE.
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 Value gap — currently 16 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 4 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate VALE's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about VALE and WY?
VALE: 2 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WY: 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 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.