EPAM vs JPM Stock Comparison
EPAM currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 67 vs 49. The clearest difference is momentum, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between EPAM and JPM?
EPAM leads the current stock comparison as EPAM Systems, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
EPAM Systems, Inc. vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
EPAM leads
EPAM leads by 18 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value. Wall Street currently favors JPM on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support EPAM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
EPAM Systems, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EPAM over JPM, 67 versus 49 as of Nov 7, 2026. EPAM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. EPAM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors JPM. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EPAM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. EPAM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions.
Compare EPAM Systems, 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 EPAM 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.
- Momentum86 vs 51EPAM +35
- Value74 vs 43EPAM +31
- Risk Resilience52 vs 61JPM +9
- Quality53 vs 46EPAM +7
3 of 6 evidence groups favor EPAM. EPAM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-11-06, compared against the prior scored session 2026-11-05.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
EPAM's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — EPAM and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EPAM (EPAM Systems, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, analyst expectations.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
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
EPAMEPAM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EPAMEPAM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EPAMEPAM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 points.
Momentum
EPAMEPAM on the Momentum factor, by 35 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
JPMJPM on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors EPAM, analyst targets favor JPM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | EPAM | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -28.6% | +11.5% | JPM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +48.4% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EPAM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | EPAM | 67 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | revenue growth 1.1% vs -7.6%; EPS growth 28.8% vs -27.6%; TTM ROE 11.2% vs 17.9%; gross margin 28.3% vs 63.2%; operating margin 10.3% vs 28.2% — JPM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EPAM | Value 74 vs 43 |
| Technicals | EPAM | Price vs 50-day 30.7% vs -2.1%; vs 200-day 30.8% vs 3.3% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 52 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | JPM | Target upside -28.6% vs 11.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of EPAM 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 wide at 18 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 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 EPAM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 8 – Nov 6EPAM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- EPAM +18
- 67 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- EPAM +17
- 68 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- EPAM +18
- 65 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- EPAM +14
- 66 vs 52
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.
5 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only EPAM
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.15%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only JPM
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, MACD Bullish Crossover.
EPAM 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 -3.86%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.84%, 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.
- 1JPM closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to EPAM's edge.
- 2JPM's EMA Ribbon Compression turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3EPAM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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
JPM leads on balance| Metric | EPAM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.1% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 28.8% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 28.3% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 10.3% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.2% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.04 | 3.32 |
Performance
EPAM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | EPAM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 13.4% | -0.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 31.2% | 0.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 55% | -7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 34.6% | 10.7% |
| Year to date | -22.2% | 3.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -1% | 7.3% |
Technicals
EPAM has the stronger structure| Metric | EPAM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 71.6 | 50.7 |
| ADX (14) | 37.9 | 14.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 30.7% | -2.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 30.8% | 3.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 83.4% | 26.8% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | EPAM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.2 | 0.8 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.12 | 0.23 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.15 | 0.32 |
| Max drawdown | -65.7% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -28% | -8.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 56.1% | 22.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, EPAM or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EPAM is the stronger of the two as of Nov 7, 2026, scoring 67 against JPM's 49. The edge comes from momentum and value. JPM is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 EPAM or JPM the better buy right now?
EPAM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Nov 7, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 EPAM over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. EPAM leads Momentum by 35 points; EPAM leads Value by 31 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, EPAM or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply -28.6% upside for EPAM and +11.5% for JPM, so the Street currently favors JPM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors EPAM. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, EPAM or JPM?
EPAM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EPAM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 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, EPAM or JPM?
EPAM 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, EPAM or JPM?
EPAM on the Momentum factor, by 35 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, EPAM or JPM?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 EPAM more profitable than JPM?
JPM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 28.3% vs 63.2%; operating margin 10.3% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 11.2% vs 17.9%.
Is EPAM's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
EPAM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-08 and 2026-11-06. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the EPAM vs JPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to EPAM's edge; JPM's EMA Ribbon Compression turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; EPAM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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 EPAM and JPM?
EPAM: 5 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. JPM: 3 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 EPAM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare EPAM 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.