BIDU vs YMM Stock Comparison
Compare BIDU and YMM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BIDU and YMM?
YMM leads the current stock comparison as Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Baidu, Inc. vs Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd.
YMM leads
YMM leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 15 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 6 of 6 evidence groups support YMM, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Baidu, Inc.
Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors YMM over BIDU, 58 versus 47 as of Sep 11, 2026. YMM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while BIDU holds the stronger momentum profile. YMM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 6 of 6 covered evidence groups favor YMM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. YMM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Baidu, Inc. and Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd. 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 BIDU and YMM 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.
- Quality42 vs 70YMM +28
- Value57 vs 67YMM +10
- Risk Resilience51 vs 60YMM +9
- Momentum40 vs 32BIDU +8
6 of 6 evidence groups favor YMM. YMM’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; BIDU keeps a meaningful momentum 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
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
YMM's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BIDU and YMM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
YMM (Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
BIDU (Baidu, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum — but at materially higher volatility, 58.1% against 32.3%.
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
YMMYMM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
YMMYMM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
YMMYMM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
BIDUBIDU on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
YMMYMM on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
YMMYMM 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 | BIDU | YMM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +30.9% | +39.7% | YMM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +65.2% | +29.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 3 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
6 of 6 covered evidence groups favor YMM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | YMM | 47 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | YMM | revenue growth -2.6% vs 18.4%; EPS growth -32.5% vs 8.2%; TTM ROE -1.7% vs 10.6%; gross margin 40.8% vs 65.9%; operating margin -6% vs 33.6% |
| Valuation | YMM | Value 57 vs 67 |
| Technicals | YMM | Price vs 50-day -12.5% vs -8.5%; vs 200-day -26% vs -12.4% |
| Risk Resilience | YMM | Risk Resilience 51 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | YMM | Target upside 30.9% vs 39.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BIDU and YMM 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 moderate at 11 points.
- 6 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 YMM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10YMM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- YMM +11
- 47 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- YMM +12
- 47 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- YMM +15
- 41 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- YMM +13
- 46 vs 59
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
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (17.16%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.67%)
1 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.98%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
YMM 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.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.89%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.37%, 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.
- 1BIDU closes the Quality gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to YMM's edge.
- 2BIDU's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3YMM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 11-point move would eliminate YMM'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
YMM leads on balance| Metric | BIDU | YMM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -2.6% | 18.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -32.5% | 8.2% |
| Gross margin | 40.8% | 65.9% |
| Operating margin | -6% | 33.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -1.7% | 10.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.42 | 0 |
Performance
YMM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BIDU | YMM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4% | -5.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.6% | -12.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -22.9% | -2.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -27.6% | -10.8% |
| Year to date | -29.6% | -24.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.8% | -38.4% |
Technicals
YMM has the stronger structure| Metric | BIDU | YMM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.2 | 38.6 |
| ADX (14) | 22.3 | 28.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -12.5% | -8.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -26% | -12.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 58.1% | 32.3% |
Risk
YMM is the more resilient| Metric | BIDU | YMM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.75 | 1.26 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.17 | -1.23 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.26 | -1.61 |
| Max drawdown | -44.3% | -46.1% |
| Current drawdown | -44.3% | -41.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 51.9% | 37.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.7% | -3.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BIDU or YMM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, YMM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 58 against BIDU's 47. The edge comes from quality and value. BIDU 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 BIDU or YMM the better buy right now?
YMM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 6 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 YMM over BIDU?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. YMM leads Quality by 28 points; YMM leads Value by 10 points; YMM leads Risk Resilience by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BIDU or YMM?
Analyst price targets imply +30.9% upside for BIDU and +39.7% for YMM, so the Street currently favors YMM. 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, BIDU or YMM?
YMM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. YMM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, BIDU or YMM?
YMM 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, BIDU or YMM?
BIDU on the Momentum factor, by 8 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, BIDU or YMM?
YMM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. YMM on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 BIDU more profitable than YMM?
YMM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 40.8% vs 65.9%; operating margin -6% vs 33.6%; ttm roe -1.7% vs 10.6%.
Is YMM's lead over BIDU getting stronger or weaker?
YMM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the BIDU vs YMM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BIDU closes the Quality gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to YMM's edge; BIDU's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; YMM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 11-point move would eliminate YMM's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BIDU and YMM?
BIDU: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. YMM: 1 bullish / 3 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 BIDU is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On YMM it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BIDU and YMM 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.