BEAM vs CRSP Stock Comparison
Compare BEAM and CRSP across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BEAM and CRSP?
BEAM leads the current stock comparison as Beam Therapeutics Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Beam Therapeutics Inc. vs CRISPR Therapeutics AG
BEAM leads
BEAM leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from CRSP.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support BEAM, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Beam Therapeutics Inc.
CRISPR Therapeutics AG
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BEAM over CRSP, 33 versus 29 as of Sep 11, 2026. BEAM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while CRSP holds the stronger risk resilience profile. BEAM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BEAM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. BEAM lead: Reversed — CRSP led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BEAM now leads by 4.
Compare Beam Therapeutics Inc. and CRISPR Therapeutics AG 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 BEAM and CRSP 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.
- Quality35 vs 23BEAM +12
- Risk Resilience36 vs 41CRSP +5
- Momentum28 vs 24BEAM +4
- Value34 vs 34Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor BEAM. BEAM’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; CRSP keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -7
No new signals fired.
BEAM's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BEAM and CRSP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BEAM (Beam Therapeutics Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
CRSP (CRISPR Therapeutics AG): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, 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
BEAMBEAM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CRSPCRSP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
BEAMBEAM on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
CRSPCRSP on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
BEAMBEAM 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 | BEAM | CRSP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +148% | +31.1% | BEAM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +68.9% | +36.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 6 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BEAM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BEAM | 33 vs 29 |
| Fundamentals | CRSPon balance | revenue growth -98.5% vs 6%; EPS growth -29.7% vs 26.6%; TTM ROE -7.7% vs -24.4%; gross margin 18.9% vs -15.3%; operating margin -242.3% vs -39.7% — CRSP takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 34 vs 34 |
| Technicals | CRSP | Price vs 50-day -16.7% vs -3.6%; vs 200-day -11.8% vs -1.9% |
| Risk Resilience | CRSP | Risk Resilience 36 vs 41 |
| Analyst expectations | BEAM | Target upside 148% vs 31.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BEAM and CRSP 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 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)
- 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 BEAM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10BEAM lead: Reversed — CRSP led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BEAM now leads by 4.
- Today
- BEAM +4
- 33 vs 29
- 7 sessions ago
- BEAM +5
- 44 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- CRSP +3
- 41 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- BEAM +2
- 46 vs 44
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 9 when BEAM moved ahead of CRSP.
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 / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.72%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.71%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.70%)
BEAM 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 -1.56%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.03%, 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.
- 1CRSP closes the Quality gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to BEAM's edge.
- 2CRSP's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3BEAM'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
CRSP leads on balance| Metric | BEAM | CRSP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -98.5% | 6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -29.7% | 26.6% |
| Gross margin | 18.9% | -15.3% |
| Operating margin | -242.3% | -39.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -7.7% | -24.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.23 | 0.45 |
Performance
CRSP leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | BEAM | CRSP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -16.8% | -8.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.8% | -3.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -17.4% | 5.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -6.6% | 4.7% |
| Year to date | -12.1% | -0.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 22.2% | -3.4% |
Technicals
CRSP has the stronger structure| Metric | BEAM | CRSP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 35.9 | 32.5 |
| ADX (14) | 19.1 | 24.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -16.7% | -3.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -11.8% | -1.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 73% | 61.3% |
Risk
CRSP is the more resilient| Metric | BEAM | CRSP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.16 | 1.81 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.55 | 0.19 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.07 | 0.32 |
| Max drawdown | -38.1% | -42.3% |
| Current drawdown | -35.7% | -31.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 75.2% | 60.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.8% | -5.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BEAM or CRSP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BEAM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 33 against CRSP's 29. The edge comes from quality and momentum. CRSP 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 BEAM or CRSP the better buy right now?
BEAM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BEAM over CRSP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BEAM leads Quality by 12 points; CRSP leads Risk Resilience by 5 points; BEAM leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BEAM or CRSP?
Analyst price targets imply +148% upside for BEAM and +31.1% for CRSP, so the Street currently favors BEAM. 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, BEAM or CRSP?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, BEAM or CRSP?
CRSP 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, BEAM or CRSP?
BEAM on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, BEAM or CRSP?
CRSP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CRSP on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 BEAM more profitable than CRSP?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 18.9% vs -15.3%; operating margin -242.3% vs -39.7%; ttm roe -7.7% vs -24.4%. BEAM leads on two measures and CRSP 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 BEAM's lead over CRSP getting stronger or weaker?
BEAM lead: Reversed — CRSP led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BEAM now leads by 4. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-09, when BEAM moved ahead of CRSP.
What would change the BEAM vs CRSP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CRSP closes the Quality gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to BEAM's edge; CRSP's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; BEAM'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 BEAM and CRSP?
BEAM: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. CRSP: 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 BEAM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CRSP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BEAM and CRSP 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.