AMD vs QCOM Stock Comparison
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. vs QUALCOMM Incorporated
QCOM leads
QCOM leads by 25 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 22 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AMD on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support QCOM, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
QUALCOMM Incorporated
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors QCOM over AMD, 69 versus 44 as of Sep 2, 2026. QCOM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality. QCOM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AMD. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor QCOM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. QCOM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 22 to 25 points over 30 sessions. QCOM 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 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. and QUALCOMM Incorporated across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
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.
- Value30%24 vs 69QCOM +45
- Quality30%63 vs 83QCOM +20
- Momentum25%47 vs 66QCOM +19
- Risk Resilience15%39 vs 47QCOM +8
4 of 6 evidence groups favor QCOM. QCOM’s edge is concentrated in value and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-01, compared against the prior scored session 2026-08-31.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
QCOM's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMD and QCOM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
QCOM (QUALCOMM Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
AMD (Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.): the counter-case, on technicals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 56% against 40.7%.
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
QCOMQCOM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
AMDAMD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
QCOMQCOM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 45 points.
Momentum
QCOMQCOM on the Momentum factor, by 19 points.
Lower downside
QCOMQCOM on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
AMDAMD on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors QCOM, analyst targets favor AMD. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AMD | QCOM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +21.6% | +19.7% | AMD has more room |
| Target dispersion | +177.7% | +137.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 27 | 20 | 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 QCOM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | QCOM | 44 vs 69 |
| Fundamentals | QCOMon balance | revenue growth 12.5% vs -6.2%; EPS growth 64.7% vs -72.7%; ROE 10.1% vs 37.3%; gross margin 53.2% vs 54.2%; operating margin 15.7% vs 23.2% — QCOM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | QCOM | Value 24 vs 69 |
| Technicals | AMD | Price vs 50-day -9.2% vs -1.6%; vs 200-day 39.8% vs 1.5% |
| Risk Resilience | QCOM | Risk Resilience 39 vs 47 |
| Analyst expectations | AMD | Target upside 21.6% vs 19.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMD and QCOM and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 25 points. (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)
- 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 QCOM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 20 – Sep 1QCOM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 22 to 25 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- QCOM +25
- 44 vs 69
- 7 sessions ago
- QCOM +19
- 44 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- QCOM +22
- 39 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- QCOM +12
- 46 vs 58
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (49.90%)
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.13%)
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.67%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.62%)
QCOM 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 -0.32%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.79%, 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.
- 1AMD closes the Value gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to QCOM's edge.
- 2AMD's Beta Spike Warning resolves — a bearish risk rule currently active against it.
- 3QCOM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
QCOM leads on balance| Metric | AMD | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 12.5% | -6.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 64.7% | -72.7% |
| Gross margin | 53.2% | 54.2% |
| Operating margin | 15.7% | 23.2% |
| Return on equity | 10.1% | 37.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.06 | 0.55 |
Technicals
AMD has the stronger structure| Metric | AMD | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.8 | 64.5 |
| ADX (14) | 9.2 | 12.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.2% | -1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 39.8% | 1.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 56% | 40.7% |
Risk
QCOM is the more resilient| Metric | AMD | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.17 | 2.04 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.73 | 0.29 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.02 | 0.43 |
| Max drawdown | -27.8% | -41.2% |
| Current drawdown | -19% | -32.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 71.8% | 51.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.9% | -4.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AMD or QCOM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, QCOM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 2, 2026, scoring 69 against AMD's 44. The edge comes from value and quality. 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 AMD or QCOM the better buy right now?
QCOM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 2, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor QCOM over AMD?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. QCOM leads Value by 45 points; QCOM leads Quality by 20 points; QCOM leads Momentum by 19 points. QCOM leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by AMD 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, AMD or QCOM?
Analyst price targets imply +21.6% upside for AMD and +19.7% for QCOM, so the Street currently favors AMD. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors QCOM. 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, AMD or QCOM?
QCOM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. QCOM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 45 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, AMD or QCOM?
AMD 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, AMD or QCOM?
QCOM on the Momentum factor, by 19 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, AMD or QCOM?
QCOM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. QCOM on Risk Resilience, by 8 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AMD more profitable than QCOM?
QCOM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 53.2% vs 54.2%; operating margin 15.7% vs 23.2%; roe 10.1% vs 37.3%.
Is QCOM's lead over AMD getting stronger or weaker?
QCOM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 22 to 25 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-20 and 2026-09-01. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the AMD vs QCOM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AMD closes the Value gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to QCOM's edge; AMD's Beta Spike Warning resolves — a bearish risk rule currently active against it; QCOM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 AMD and QCOM?
AMD: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. QCOM: 2 bullish / 1 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 AMD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On QCOM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AMD and QCOM 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.