CSCO vs MDB Stock Comparison
CSCO currently leads MDB in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 46. The clearest difference is value, while MDB has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between CSCO and MDB?
CSCO leads the current stock comparison as Cisco Systems, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Cisco Systems, Inc. vs MongoDB, Inc.
CSCO leads
CSCO leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 20 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support CSCO, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Cisco Systems, Inc.
MongoDB, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CSCO over MDB, 59 versus 46 as of Oct 21, 2026. CSCO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while MDB holds the stronger momentum profile. CSCO also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CSCO today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. CSCO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Cisco Systems, Inc. and MongoDB, 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 CSCO and MDB 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.
- Value53 vs 25CSCO +28
- Quality78 vs 62CSCO +16
- Risk Resilience59 vs 49CSCO +10
- Momentum44 vs 52MDB +8
5 of 6 evidence groups favor CSCO. CSCO’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; MDB 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 -2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
CSCO's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CSCO and MDB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CSCO (Cisco Systems, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
MDB (MongoDB, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 82.4% against 30.9%.
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
CSCOCSCO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CSCOCSCO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CSCOCSCO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 points.
Momentum
MDBMDB on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
CSCOCSCO on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
CSCOCSCO 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 | CSCO | MDB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20.5% | +15.7% | CSCO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +30.9% | +54.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 21 | 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 CSCO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CSCO | 59 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | CSCOon balance | revenue growth 8.9% vs -1.1%; EPS growth 15.3% vs -70.9%; TTM ROE 27.4% vs 2%; gross margin 64.5% vs 72.7% — CSCO takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CSCO | Value 53 vs 25 |
| Technicals | MDB | Price vs 50-day -3.4% vs -0.6%; vs 200-day 7% vs 8% |
| Risk Resilience | CSCO | Risk Resilience 59 vs 49 |
| Analyst expectations | CSCO | Target upside 20.5% vs 15.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CSCO and MDB 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 wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 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 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 CSCO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CSCO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CSCO +13
- 59 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- CSCO +19
- 62 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- CSCO +20
- 59 vs 39
- 90 sessions ago
- MDB +1
- 55 vs 56
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 21 when CSCO moved ahead of MDB.
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
No signal that the other name lacks.
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only MDB
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.70%)
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
CSCO 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 +0.52%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +6.71%, 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.
- 1MDB closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to CSCO's edge.
- 2MDB's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3CSCO'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 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate CSCO'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
CSCO leads on balance| Metric | CSCO | MDB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.9% | -1.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 15.3% | -70.9% |
| Gross margin | 64.5% | 72.7% |
| Operating margin | 24.3% | -0.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 27.4% | 2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.59 | 0.01 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | CSCO | MDB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -7.3% | -1.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.3% | -14.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.9% | 20.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 19% | 40.1% |
| Year to date | 38.5% | -12.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 54.5% | 16.5% |
Technicals
MDB has the stronger structure| Metric | CSCO | MDB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.4 | 56.5 |
| ADX (14) | 21.8 | 13.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.4% | -0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7% | 8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.9% | 82.4% |
Risk
CSCO is the more resilient| Metric | CSCO | MDB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.1 | 1.82 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.26 | 0.5 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.67 | 0.68 |
| Max drawdown | -18.1% | -48.7% |
| Current drawdown | -17.9% | -22.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 35.3% | 71.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CSCO or MDB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CSCO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 59 against MDB's 46. The edge comes from value and quality. MDB 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 CSCO or MDB the better buy right now?
CSCO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 CSCO over MDB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CSCO leads Value by 28 points; CSCO leads Quality by 16 points; CSCO leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CSCO or MDB?
Analyst price targets imply +20.5% upside for CSCO and +15.7% for MDB, so the Street currently favors CSCO. 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, CSCO or MDB?
CSCO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CSCO 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, CSCO or MDB?
CSCO 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, CSCO or MDB?
MDB 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, CSCO or MDB?
CSCO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CSCO on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 CSCO more profitable than MDB?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 64.5% vs 72.7%; operating margin 24.3% vs -0.5%; ttm roe 27.4% vs 2%. Each name leads 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 CSCO's lead over MDB getting stronger or weaker?
CSCO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-21, when CSCO moved ahead of MDB.
What would change the CSCO vs MDB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MDB closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to CSCO's edge; MDB's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; CSCO'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 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate CSCO's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about CSCO and MDB?
CSCO: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. MDB: 1 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 CSCO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On MDB it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CSCO and MDB 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.