BMY vs GILD Stock Comparison
BMY currently leads GILD in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 46. The clearest difference is quality, while GILD has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between BMY and GILD?
BMY leads the current stock comparison as Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company vs Gilead Sciences, Inc.
BMY leads
BMY leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support BMY, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BMY over GILD, 59 versus 46 as of Oct 21, 2026. BMY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while GILD holds the stronger momentum profile. BMY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BMY today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. BMY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Gilead Sciences, Inc. 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 BMY and GILD 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.
- Quality71 vs 30BMY +41
- Value65 vs 37BMY +28
- Momentum47 vs 74GILD +27
- Risk Resilience41 vs 46GILD +5
4 of 6 evidence groups favor BMY. BMY’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; GILD keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +18
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
BMY's lead widened by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BMY and GILD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BMY (Bristol-Myers Squibb Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
GILD (Gilead Sciences, Inc.): 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
BMYBMY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BMYBMY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BMYBMY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 points.
Momentum
GILDGILD on the Momentum factor, by 27 points.
Lower downside
GILDGILD on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
BMYBMY 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 | BMY | GILD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +7.2% | -2.9% | BMY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +62.6% | +36.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 12 | 8 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | BMY | GILD |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 1.61% | 3.04% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.290 | $2.720 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.480 | $3.160 |
| Years increased | 4 | 5 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #305 |
GILD grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 3.04% a year against BMY's 1.61%. GILD never reduced its regular dividend in the window; BMY did in 1 year.
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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BMY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BMY | 59 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | BMYon balance | revenue growth 12.9% vs 12.1%; EPS growth 23.7% vs -6.2%; TTM ROE 46.8% vs -16.3%; gross margin 70.2% vs 79.6%; operating margin 28.3% vs -4.9% — BMY takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BMY | Value 65 vs 37 |
| Technicals | GILD | Price vs 50-day -3.5% vs 4%; vs 200-day 3.3% vs 13.1% |
| Risk Resilience | GILD | Risk Resilience 41 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | BMY | Target upside 7.2% vs -2.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BMY and GILD and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 BMY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20BMY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BMY +13
- 59 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- BMY +13
- 58 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- BMY +12
- 58 vs 46
- 90 sessions ago
- BMY +10
- 65 vs 55
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only BMY
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
5 bullish / 0 bearish
Only GILD
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.9%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 5 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.91%, AIQ +5 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.88%, 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.
- 1GILD closes the Quality gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to BMY's edge.
- 2GILD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3BMY's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
BMY leads on balance| Metric | BMY | GILD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 12.9% | 12.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 23.7% | -6.2% |
| Gross margin | 70.2% | 79.6% |
| Operating margin | 28.3% | -4.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 46.8% | -16.3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.93 | 2.22 |
Performance
GILD leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BMY | GILD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 8.8% | 5.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.9% | 2.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.5% | 20.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.9% | 17.4% |
| Year to date | 14.3% | 26.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 42.2% | 32.8% |
Technicals
GILD has the stronger structure| Metric | BMY | GILD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.8 | 61.6 |
| ADX (14) | 19.7 | 23.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.5% | 4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 3.3% | 13.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 35.8% | 26.9% |
Risk
GILD is the more resilient| Metric | BMY | GILD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.19 | 0.3 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.23 | 0.9 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.22 | 1.71 |
| Max drawdown | -16.8% | -22% |
| Current drawdown | -9.4% | -0.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 28.3% | 26.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BMY or GILD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BMY is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 59 against GILD's 46. The edge comes from quality and value. GILD 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 BMY or GILD the better buy right now?
BMY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BMY over GILD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BMY leads Quality by 41 points; BMY leads Value by 28 points; GILD leads Momentum by 27 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BMY or GILD?
Analyst price targets imply +7.2% upside for BMY and -2.9% for GILD, so the Street currently favors BMY. 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, BMY or GILD?
BMY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BMY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 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, BMY or GILD?
BMY 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, BMY or GILD?
GILD on the Momentum factor, by 27 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, BMY or GILD?
GILD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GILD 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 BMY more profitable than GILD?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 70.2% vs 79.6%; operating margin 28.3% vs -4.9%; ttm roe 46.8% vs -16.3%. BMY leads on two measures and GILD 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 BMY's lead over GILD getting stronger or weaker?
BMY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the BMY vs GILD verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: GILD closes the Quality gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to BMY's edge; GILD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; BMY's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 BMY and GILD?
BMY: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. GILD: 5 bullish / 0 bearish. The most decision-relevant rule on BMY is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On GILD it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BMY and GILD 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.