ACAD vs TSM Stock Comparison
ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. vs Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
ACAD leads
ACAD leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value. Wall Street currently favors TSM on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ACAD, and its current signal state is conflicted.
ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ACAD over TSM, 70 versus 62 as of Sep 5, 2026. ACAD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while TSM holds the stronger quality profile. ACAD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TSM. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ACAD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. ACAD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare ACAD and TSM 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%59 vs 42ACAD +17
- Value30%57 vs 42ACAD +15
- Quality30%92 vs 96TSM +4
- Risk Resilience15%68 vs 69Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ACAD. ACAD’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; TSM keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No new signals fired.
ACAD's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ACAD and TSM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ACAD (ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
TSM (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, 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
ACADACAD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
TSMTSM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ACADACAD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
ACADACAD on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
TSMTSM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
TSMTSM on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ACAD, analyst targets favor TSM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ACAD | TSM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20.3% | +35.1% | TSM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +102.3% | +38% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 6 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ACAD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ACAD | 70 vs 62 |
| Fundamentals | TSMon balance | revenue growth 14.9% vs 12%; EPS growth 8% vs 22.1%; TTM ROE 32.4% vs 39.3%; gross margin 91.1% vs 64.2%; operating margin 7.6% vs 56% — TSM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ACAD | Value 57 vs 42 |
| Technicals | ACAD | Price vs 50-day 3% vs 2%; vs 200-day 14% vs 12.1% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 68 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | TSM | Target upside 20.3% vs 35.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ACAD and TSM 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.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 ACAD.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3ACAD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ACAD +8
- 70 vs 62
- 7 sessions ago
- ACAD +7
- 69 vs 62
- 30 sessions ago
- ACAD +6
- 74 vs 68
- 90 sessions ago
- ACAD +6
- 74 vs 68
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Jun 22 when ACAD moved ahead of TSM.
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.27%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.02%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
ACAD 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 +0.57%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.85%, 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.
- 1TSM closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to ACAD's edge.
- 2TSM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3ACAD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
TSM leads on balance| Metric | ACAD | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 14.9% | 12% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 8% | 22.1% |
| Gross margin | 91.1% | 64.2% |
| Operating margin | 7.6% | 56% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 32.4% | 39.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.06 | 0.15 |
Technicals
ACAD has the stronger structure| Metric | ACAD | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.6 | 43.6 |
| ADX (14) | 32.9 | 7.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3% | 2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 14% | 12.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 36.6% | 24.3% |
Risk
Split| Metric | ACAD | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.83 | 2.18 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.3 | 1.57 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.48 | 2.52 |
| Max drawdown | -27.6% | -21.6% |
| Current drawdown | -8.9% | -12.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 38% | 40.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.5% | -4.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ACAD or TSM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ACAD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 70 against TSM's 62. The edge comes from momentum and value. TSM is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 ACAD or TSM the better buy right now?
ACAD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ACAD over TSM?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. ACAD leads Momentum by 17 points; ACAD leads Value by 15 points; TSM leads Quality by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ACAD or TSM?
Analyst price targets imply +20.3% upside for ACAD and +35.1% for TSM, so the Street currently favors TSM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ACAD. 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, ACAD or TSM?
ACAD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ACAD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, ACAD or TSM?
TSM 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, ACAD or TSM?
ACAD on the Momentum factor, by 17 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, ACAD or TSM?
TSM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ACAD more profitable than TSM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 91.1% vs 64.2%; operating margin 7.6% vs 56%; ttm roe 32.4% vs 39.3%. ACAD leads on one measure and TSM 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 ACAD's lead over TSM getting stronger or weaker?
ACAD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-22, when ACAD moved ahead of TSM.
What would change the ACAD vs TSM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TSM closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to ACAD's edge; TSM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; ACAD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about ACAD and TSM?
ACAD: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TSM: 1 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 ACAD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TSM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ACAD and TSM with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.