AZN vs TEVA Stock Comparison
Compare AZN and TEVA across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AZN and TEVA?
AZN leads the current stock comparison as AstraZeneca PLC, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
AstraZeneca PLC vs Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited
AZN leads
AZN leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from TEVA.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support AZN, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
AstraZeneca PLC
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AZN over TEVA, 58 versus 52 as of Sep 6, 2026. AZN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while TEVA holds the stronger value profile. AZN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AZN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. AZN lead: Reversed — TEVA led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AZN now leads by 6.
Compare AstraZeneca PLC and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited 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 AZN and TEVA 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.
- Quality30%72 vs 33AZN +39
- Value30%53 vs 65TEVA +12
- Momentum25%52 vs 60TEVA +8
- Risk Resilience15%48 vs 53TEVA +5
3 of 6 evidence groups favor AZN. AZN’s edge is concentrated in quality; TEVA keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
AZN's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AZN and TEVA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AZN (AstraZeneca PLC): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
TEVA (Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited): the counter-case, on value, momentum, risk resilience — but at materially higher volatility, 28.3% against 21.4%.
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
AZNAZN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
AZNAZN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TEVATEVA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
TEVATEVA on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
TEVATEVA on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
AZNAZN 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 | AZN | TEVA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +32.8% | +18.3% | AZN has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +18.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 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 AZN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AZN | 58 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | AZN | EPS growth -19.6% vs -253.1%; TTM ROE 21.7% vs 9.2%; gross margin 79.3% vs 52.5%; operating margin 22.7% vs 14.9% |
| Valuation | TEVA | Value 53 vs 65 |
| Technicals | TEVA | Price vs 50-day -3.8% vs 5%; vs 200-day -11.5% vs 11.6% |
| Risk Resilience | TEVA | Risk Resilience 48 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | AZN | Target upside 32.8% vs 18.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AZN and TEVA 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 6 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 AZN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5AZN lead: Reversed — TEVA led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AZN now leads by 6.
- Today
- AZN +6
- 58 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- AZN +5
- 57 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- TEVA +6
- 50 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- AZN +12
- 64 vs 52
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 21 when AZN moved ahead of TEVA.
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, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.74%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.26%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
AZN 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 -1.26%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.71%, 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.
- 1TEVA closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to AZN's edge.
- 2TEVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3AZN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
AZN leads on balance| Metric | AZN | TEVA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.6% | 4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -19.6% | -253.1% |
| Gross margin | 79.3% | 52.5% |
| Operating margin | 22.7% | 14.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 21.7% | 9.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.64 | 2.16 |
Performance
TEVA leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AZN | TEVA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0% | -0.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.8% | 2.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -12.5% | 6.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.2% | 17.1% |
| Year to date | -11.5% | 16.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 0% | 93.8% |
Technicals
TEVA has the stronger structure| Metric | AZN | TEVA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.5 | 49.4 |
| ADX (14) | 15.2 | 33.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.8% | 5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -11.5% | 11.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.4% | 28.3% |
Risk
TEVA is the more resilient| Metric | AZN | TEVA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.25 | 0.72 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.02 | 1.8 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.03 | 3.9 |
| Max drawdown | -25.7% | -21.8% |
| Current drawdown | -22.3% | -4.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 28.3% | 39.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -3.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AZN or TEVA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AZN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 58 against TEVA's 52. The edge comes from quality. TEVA is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 AZN or TEVA the better buy right now?
AZN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 AZN over TEVA?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. AZN leads Quality by 39 points; TEVA leads Value by 12 points; TEVA leads Momentum by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AZN or TEVA?
Analyst price targets imply +32.8% upside for AZN and +18.3% for TEVA, so the Street currently favors AZN. 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, AZN or TEVA?
TEVA is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TEVA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 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, AZN or TEVA?
AZN 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, AZN or TEVA?
TEVA on the Momentum factor, by 8 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, AZN or TEVA?
TEVA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TEVA on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 AZN more profitable than TEVA?
AZN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 79.3% vs 52.5%; operating margin 22.7% vs 14.9%; ttm roe 21.7% vs 9.2%.
Is AZN's lead over TEVA getting stronger or weaker?
AZN lead: Reversed — TEVA led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AZN now leads by 6. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-21, when AZN moved ahead of TEVA.
What would change the AZN vs TEVA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TEVA closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to AZN's edge; TEVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; AZN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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 AZN and TEVA?
AZN: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. TEVA: 3 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 AZN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TEVA it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AZN and TEVA 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.