DKS vs TSM Stock Comparison
TSM currently leads DKS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 66 vs 51. The clearest difference is quality, while DKS has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between DKS and TSM?
TSM leads the current stock comparison as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc. vs Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
TSM leads
TSM leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support TSM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TSM over DKS, 66 versus 51 as of Oct 31, 2026. TSM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while DKS holds the stronger value profile. TSM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TSM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. TSM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc. and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited 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 DKS and TSM 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.
- Quality39 vs 98TSM +59
- Value69 vs 45DKS +24
- Risk Resilience51 vs 65TSM +14
- Momentum45 vs 52TSM +7
5 of 6 evidence groups favor TSM. TSM’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; DKS keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
TSM's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DKS and TSM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TSM (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
DKS (DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation.
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
TSMTSM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TSMTSM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DKSDKS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 24 points.
Momentum
TSMTSM on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
TSMTSM on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
TSMTSM 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 | DKS | TSM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +24.3% | +45% | TSM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +101.2% | +34% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 18 | 7 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | DKS | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 31.14% | 15.29% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.251 | $1.360 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $4.850 | $2.769 |
| Years increased | 4 | 4 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
DKS grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 31.14% a year against TSM's 15.29%. They are ranked in different cohorts — variable-dividend payers and US dividend-paying corporations — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TSM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TSM | 51 vs 66 |
| Fundamentals | TSM | revenue growth 8.2% vs 17.6%; EPS growth -1.7% vs 8%; TTM ROE 15% vs 41.2%; gross margin 32.1% vs 65.8%; operating margin 6.8% vs 57.9% |
| Valuation | DKS | Value 69 vs 45 |
| Technicals | TSM | Price vs 50-day 3.6% vs -6.6%; vs 200-day -29.6% vs 10.1% |
| Risk Resilience | TSM | Risk Resilience 51 vs 65 |
| Analyst expectations | TSM | Target upside 24.3% vs 45% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DKS and TSM 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 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (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 TSM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30TSM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TSM +15
- 51 vs 66
- 7 sessions ago
- DKS +1
- 58 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- TSM +13
- 55 vs 68
- 90 sessions ago
- TSM +23
- 39 vs 62
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Oct 27 when TSM moved ahead of DKS.
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 DKS
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (39.22%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.64%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only TSM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.88%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
TSM 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.3%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -5.95%, 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.
- 1DKS closes the Quality gap — currently 59 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSM's edge.
- 2DKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TSM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 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
TSM leads on balance| Metric | DKS | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.2% | 17.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -1.7% | 8% |
| Gross margin | 32.1% | 65.8% |
| Operating margin | 6.8% | 57.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 15% | 41.2% |
| Debt to equity | 1.39 | 0.14 |
Performance
TSM leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | DKS | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.1% | 1.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.4% | -3.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -31.9% | 9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -38.1% | 11.6% |
| Year to date | -31.2% | 44.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -39.6% | 49% |
Technicals
TSM has the stronger structure| Metric | DKS | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52.4 | 41.8 |
| ADX (14) | 21.6 | 19.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3.6% | -6.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -29.6% | 10.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 34.9% | 35.7% |
Risk
TSM is the more resilient| Metric | DKS | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.83 | 2.14 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.91 | 1.06 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.98 | 1.68 |
| Max drawdown | -49.4% | -21.6% |
| Current drawdown | -43.1% | -9.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 47.9% | 39.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.5% | -4.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DKS or TSM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TSM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 66 against DKS's 51. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. DKS is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 DKS or TSM the better buy right now?
TSM 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 TSM over DKS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TSM leads Quality by 59 points; DKS leads Value by 24 points; TSM leads Risk Resilience by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DKS or TSM?
Analyst price targets imply +24.3% upside for DKS and +45% for TSM, so the Street currently favors TSM. 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, DKS or TSM?
DKS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DKS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 24 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, DKS or TSM?
TSM 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, DKS or TSM?
TSM 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, DKS or TSM?
TSM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSM on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 DKS more profitable than TSM?
TSM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 32.1% vs 65.8%; operating margin 6.8% vs 57.9%; ttm roe 15% vs 41.2%.
Is TSM's lead over DKS getting stronger or weaker?
TSM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-27, when TSM moved ahead of DKS.
What would change the DKS vs TSM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DKS closes the Quality gap — currently 59 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSM's edge; DKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TSM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 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 DKS and TSM?
DKS: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TSM: 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 DKS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TSM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DKS and TSM 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.