CPRT vs JPM Stock Comparison
CPRT currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 53. The clearest difference is quality, while JPM has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between CPRT and JPM?
CPRT leads the current stock comparison as Copart, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Copart, Inc. vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
CPRT leads
CPRT leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support CPRT, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Copart, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CPRT over JPM, 59 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. CPRT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while JPM holds the stronger momentum profile. CPRT also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CPRT today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. CPRT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Copart, Inc. 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 CPRT 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.
- Quality67 vs 46CPRT +21
- Momentum54 vs 61JPM +7
- Risk Resilience74 vs 69CPRT +5
- Value48 vs 44CPRT +4
5 of 6 evidence groups favor CPRT. CPRT’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; 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 -3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
CPRT's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CPRT and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CPRT (Copart, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on momentum, 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
CPRTCPRT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CPRTCPRT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CPRTCPRT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
JPMJPM on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
CPRTCPRT on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
CPRTCPRT 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 | CPRT | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.5% | +10.7% | CPRT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +56% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CPRT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CPRT | 59 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | CPRTon balance | revenue growth 10.3% vs -7.6%; EPS growth 19.4% vs -27.6%; TTM ROE 16.6% vs 17.9%; gross margin 45.5% vs 63.2%; operating margin 36.6% vs 28.2% — CPRT takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CPRT | Value 48 vs 44 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day 1.3% vs -2%; vs 200-day -10.8% vs 5.2% |
| Risk Resilience | CPRT | Risk Resilience 74 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | CPRT | Target upside 18.5% vs 10.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CPRT and JPM 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 6 points.
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 CPRT.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28CPRT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CPRT +6
- 59 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- CPRT +8
- 58 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- CPRT +7
- 51 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- CPRT +12
- 64 vs 52
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Sep 14 when CPRT 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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CPRT
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (9.19%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.57%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
CPRT 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 +1.96%, AIQ -1 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 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to CPRT's edge.
- 2JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3CPRT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
CPRT leads on balance| Metric | CPRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.3% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 19.4% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 45.5% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 36.6% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16.6% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.01 | 3.32 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | CPRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 6.2% | 2.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2% | -3.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -13.1% | 9.7% |
| Year to date | -26% | 5.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -35.2% | 12.9% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | CPRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.9 | 60.9 |
| ADX (14) | 21.9 | 15 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.3% | -2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -10.8% | 5.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 35.9% | 13% |
Risk
CPRT is the more resilient| Metric | CPRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.06 | 0.73 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.26 | 0.41 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.86 | 0.56 |
| Max drawdown | -40.4% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -34.3% | -7.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.3% | 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, CPRT or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CPRT is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 59 against JPM's 53. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 CPRT or JPM the better buy right now?
CPRT carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 5 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 CPRT over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CPRT leads Quality by 21 points; JPM leads Momentum by 7 points; CPRT leads Risk Resilience by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CPRT or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +18.5% upside for CPRT and +10.7% for JPM, so the Street currently favors CPRT. 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, CPRT or JPM?
CPRT is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CPRT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 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, CPRT or JPM?
CPRT 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, CPRT or JPM?
JPM on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, CPRT or JPM?
CPRT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CPRT 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 CPRT more profitable than JPM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 45.5% vs 63.2%; operating margin 36.6% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 16.6% vs 17.9%. CPRT leads on one measure and JPM on two measures, 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 CPRT's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
CPRT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 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 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-14, when CPRT moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the CPRT 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 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to CPRT's edge; JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; CPRT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 CPRT and JPM?
CPRT: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, 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 CPRT is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CPRT 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.