ADSK vs JPM Stock Comparison
ADSK currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 71 vs 52. The clearest difference is quality, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between ADSK and JPM?
ADSK leads the current stock comparison as Autodesk, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Autodesk, Inc. vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
ADSK leads
ADSK leads by 19 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 14 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support ADSK, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Autodesk, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ADSK over JPM, 71 versus 52 as of Oct 22, 2026. ADSK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. ADSK also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ADSK today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. ADSK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 19 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Autodesk, Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. 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 ADSK and JPM 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.
- Quality84 vs 46ADSK +38
- Momentum88 vs 58ADSK +30
- Risk Resilience47 vs 68JPM +21
- Value57 vs 44ADSK +13
5 of 6 evidence groups favor ADSK. ADSK’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
ADSK's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ADSK and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ADSK (Autodesk, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience.
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
ADSKADSK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ADSKADSK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ADSKADSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 points.
Momentum
ADSKADSK on the Momentum factor, by 30 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 21 points.
Analyst upside
ADSKADSK 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 | ADSK | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20.8% | +11% | ADSK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +51.1% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ADSK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ADSK | 71 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | ADSKon balance | revenue growth 5.8% vs -7.6%; TTM ROE 52.5% vs 17.9%; gross margin 91.2% vs 63.2%; operating margin 27.5% vs 28.2% — ADSK takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ADSK | Value 57 vs 44 |
| Technicals | ADSK | Price vs 50-day 7% vs -3.2%; vs 200-day 4.4% vs 4% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 47 vs 68 |
| Analyst expectations | ADSK | Target upside 20.8% vs 11% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ADSK and JPM 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 19 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 ADSK.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20ADSK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 19 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ADSK +19
- 71 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- ADSK +25
- 72 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- ADSK +14
- 57 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- ADSK +11
- 64 vs 53
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Sep 14 when ADSK moved ahead of JPM.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only ADSK
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.99%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.65%)
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
ADSK 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 +1.78%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.24%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to ADSK's edge.
- 2JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3ADSK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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
ADSK leads on balance| Metric | ADSK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.8% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 91.2% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 27.5% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 52.5% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 1.1 | 3.32 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ADSK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 6.6% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 11.8% | -1.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 15.9% | -3.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 0% | 7.1% |
| Year to date | -17% | 4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -18.1% | 12.3% |
Technicals
ADSK has the stronger structure| Metric | ADSK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 80.4 | 57.4 |
| ADX (14) | 23.2 | 20.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7% | -3.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.4% | 4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.8% | 14.8% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | ADSK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.49 | 0.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.45 | 0.47 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.65 | 0.66 |
| Max drawdown | -40% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -21.5% | -8.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 39.1% | 22.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.2% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ADSK or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ADSK is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 71 against JPM's 52. The edge comes from quality and momentum. JPM 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 ADSK or JPM the better buy right now?
ADSK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 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 ADSK over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ADSK leads Quality by 38 points; ADSK leads Momentum by 30 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ADSK or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +20.8% upside for ADSK and +11% for JPM, so the Street currently favors ADSK. 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, ADSK or JPM?
ADSK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ADSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 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, ADSK or JPM?
ADSK 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, ADSK or JPM?
ADSK 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, ADSK or JPM?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 21 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 ADSK more profitable than JPM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 91.2% vs 63.2%; operating margin 27.5% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 52.5% vs 17.9%. ADSK leads on two measures and JPM 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 ADSK's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
ADSK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 19 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 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-14, when ADSK moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the ADSK vs JPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to ADSK's edge; JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; ADSK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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 ADSK and JPM?
ADSK: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. JPM: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. 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 ADSK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ADSK and JPM 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.