DIOD vs GFS Stock Comparison
Compare DIOD and GFS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between DIOD and GFS?
GFS leads the current stock comparison as GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Diodes Incorporated vs GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc.
GFS leads
GFS leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support GFS, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Diodes Incorporated
GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GFS over DIOD, 49 versus 47 as of Sep 11, 2026. GFS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while DIOD holds the stronger momentum profile. GFS also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GFS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. GFS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Diodes Incorporated and GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. 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 DIOD and GFS 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.
- Value46 vs 63GFS +17
- Momentum49 vs 37DIOD +12
- Risk Resilience42 vs 48GFS +6
- Quality48 vs 46Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor GFS. GFS’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; DIOD 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 +7
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No new signals fired.
GFS's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DIOD and GFS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GFS (GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
DIOD (Diodes Incorporated): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 67.4% against 38.5%.
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
GFSGFS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DIODDIOD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
GFSGFS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
DIODDIOD on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
GFSGFS on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
GFSGFS 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 | DIOD | GFS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +64.2% | +71.5% | GFS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +46.2% | +105.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 12 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GFS. 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 | 47 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | DIODon balance | revenue growth 9.9% vs 9.3%; EPS growth 209.1% vs 57.9%; TTM ROE 4.5% vs 6.1%; gross margin 31.7% vs 27.4%; operating margin 4.8% vs 11.6% — DIOD takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | GFS | Value 46 vs 63 |
| Technicals | DIOD | Price vs 50-day 2.6% vs -12.4%; vs 200-day 13.8% vs -14.1% |
| Risk Resilience | GFS | Risk Resilience 42 vs 48 |
| Analyst expectations | GFS | Target upside 64.2% vs 71.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DIOD and GFS 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 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 GFS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10GFS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GFS +2
- 47 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- GFS +3
- 42 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 48 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- GFS +4
- 40 vs 44
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 14 when DIOD moved ahead of GFS.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (14.97%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.52%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.20%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.69%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
DIOD is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +3.65%, AIQ +2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.15%, 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.
- 1DIOD closes the Value gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to GFS's edge.
- 2DIOD's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3GFS'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
DIOD leads on balance| Metric | DIOD | GFS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 9.9% | 9.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 209.1% | 57.9% |
| Gross margin | 31.7% | 27.4% |
| Operating margin | 4.8% | 11.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 4.5% | 6.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.04 | 0.14 |
Performance
DIOD leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | DIOD | GFS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.8% | 4.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -14.4% | -13.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.8% | -38.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 43.8% | 4.2% |
| Year to date | 85.8% | 31.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 72.1% | 39.6% |
Technicals
DIOD has the stronger structure| Metric | DIOD | GFS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.5 | 41.9 |
| ADX (14) | 13.5 | 29.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.6% | -12.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 13.8% | -14.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 67.4% | 38.5% |
Risk
GFS is the more resilient| Metric | DIOD | GFS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.51 | 2.19 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.09 | 0.83 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.74 | 1.36 |
| Max drawdown | -38% | -51.2% |
| Current drawdown | -25.3% | -48.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 67.3% | 59.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.4% | -5.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DIOD or GFS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GFS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against DIOD's 47. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. DIOD 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 DIOD or GFS the better buy right now?
GFS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 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 GFS over DIOD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. GFS leads Value by 17 points; DIOD leads Momentum by 12 points; GFS leads Risk Resilience by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DIOD or GFS?
Analyst price targets imply +64.2% upside for DIOD and +71.5% for GFS, so the Street currently favors GFS. 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, DIOD or GFS?
GFS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GFS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 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, DIOD or GFS?
DIOD 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, DIOD or GFS?
DIOD on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, DIOD or GFS?
GFS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GFS on Risk Resilience, by 6 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 DIOD more profitable than GFS?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 31.7% vs 27.4%; operating margin 4.8% vs 11.6%; ttm roe 4.5% vs 6.1%. DIOD leads on one measure and GFS 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 GFS's lead over DIOD getting stronger or weaker?
GFS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-14, when DIOD moved ahead of GFS.
What would change the DIOD vs GFS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DIOD closes the Value gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to GFS's edge; DIOD's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; GFS'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 DIOD and GFS?
DIOD: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. GFS: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 DIOD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On GFS it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DIOD and GFS 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.