BHP vs JPM Stock Comparison
BHP currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 55 vs 53. The clearest difference is quality, while JPM has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between BHP and JPM?
BHP leads the current stock comparison as BHP Group Limited, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
BHP Group Limited vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
BHP leads
BHP leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 12 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support BHP, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
BHP Group Limited
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BHP over JPM, 55 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. BHP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while JPM holds the stronger momentum profile. BHP also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BHP today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. BHP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare BHP Group Limited 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 BHP 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.
- Quality72 vs 46BHP +26
- Momentum41 vs 61JPM +20
- Risk Resilience65 vs 69JPM +4
- Value46 vs 44Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor BHP. BHP’s edge is concentrated in quality; JPM keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
BHP's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BHP and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BHP (BHP Group Limited): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, 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
BHPBHP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BHPBHP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
JPMJPM on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
BHPBHP 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 | BHP | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20% | +10.7% | BHP has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | BHP | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | -1.73% | 9.04% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.400 | $3.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.200 | $5.550 |
| Years increased | 2 | 5 |
| No cut in window | No (3) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #120 |
JPM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 9.04% a year against BHP's -1.73%. JPM never reduced its regular dividend in the window; BHP did in 3 years. They are ranked in different cohorts — variable-dividend payers and US dividend-paying corporations — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BHP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 55 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | BHP | revenue growth 10.8% vs -7.6%; EPS growth -25.9% vs -27.6%; TTM ROE 19.5% vs 17.9%; gross margin 74.9% vs 63.2%; operating margin 40.1% vs 28.2% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 46 vs 44 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day -9.3% vs -2%; vs 200-day 1.1% vs 5.2% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 65 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | BHP | Target upside 20% vs 10.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BHP and JPM 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 BHP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28BHP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BHP +2
- 55 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- BHP +2
- 52 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- BHP +12
- 56 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- BHP +14
- 66 vs 52
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 23 when BHP 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.
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only BHP
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only JPM
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
BHP 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 -3.25%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.9%, 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.
- 1JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to BHP's edge.
- 2JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3BHP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate BHP's advantage entirely.
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
BHP leads on balance| Metric | BHP | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.8% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -25.9% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 74.9% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 40.1% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 19.5% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.53 | 3.32 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | BHP | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.7% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.1% | 2.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.3% | -3.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.7% | 9.7% |
| Year to date | 36.2% | 5.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 47.8% | 12.9% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | BHP | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 42.4 | 60.9 |
| ADX (14) | 17.8 | 15 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.3% | -2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.1% | 5.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 29.1% | 13% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | BHP | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.58 | 0.73 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.12 | 0.41 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.69 | 0.56 |
| Max drawdown | -21.4% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -16.7% | -7.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.6% | 22% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BHP or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BHP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 55 against JPM's 53. The edge comes from quality. JPM is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 BHP or JPM the better buy right now?
BHP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BHP over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BHP leads Quality by 26 points; JPM leads Momentum by 20 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BHP or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +20% upside for BHP and +10.7% for JPM, so the Street currently favors BHP. 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, BHP or JPM?
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, BHP or JPM?
BHP 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, BHP or JPM?
JPM on the Momentum factor, by 20 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, BHP or JPM?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 BHP more profitable than JPM?
BHP leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 74.9% vs 63.2%; operating margin 40.1% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 19.5% vs 17.9%.
Is BHP's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
BHP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-23, when BHP moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the BHP 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 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to BHP's edge; JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; BHP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate BHP's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BHP and JPM?
BHP: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. JPM: 2 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 BHP is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BHP 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.