ESTC vs QCOM Stock Comparison
Compare ESTC and QCOM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ESTC and QCOM?
QCOM leads the current stock comparison as QUALCOMM Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Elastic N.V. vs QUALCOMM Incorporated
QCOM leads
QCOM leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from ESTC.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support QCOM, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Elastic N.V.
QUALCOMM Incorporated
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors QCOM over ESTC, 74 versus 65 as of Sep 11, 2026. QCOM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while ESTC holds the stronger quality profile. QCOM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor QCOM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. QCOM lead: Reversed — ESTC led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; QCOM now leads by 9.
Compare Elastic N.V. and QUALCOMM Incorporated 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 ESTC and QCOM 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.
- Momentum56 vs 85QCOM +29
- Value49 vs 69QCOM +20
- Quality95 vs 83ESTC +12
- Risk Resilience54 vs 51Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor QCOM. QCOM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; ESTC keeps a meaningful quality 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 -2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
QCOM's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ESTC and QCOM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
QCOM (QUALCOMM Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
ESTC (Elastic N.V.): the counter-case, on quality, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 95.3% against 25.8%.
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
QCOMQCOM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
QCOMQCOM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
QCOMQCOM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
QCOMQCOM on the Momentum factor, by 29 points.
Lower downside
QCOMQCOM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
QCOMQCOM 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 | ESTC | QCOM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -3.1% | +11.6% | QCOM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +87.9% | +137.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 20 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor QCOM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | QCOM | 65 vs 74 |
| Fundamentals | QCOMon balance | revenue growth 6.1% vs -6.2%; EPS growth -103.8% vs -72.7%; TTM ROE 35.3% vs 37.3%; gross margin 75.5% vs 54.2%; operating margin -1.5% vs 23.2% — QCOM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | QCOM | Value 49 vs 69 |
| Technicals | ESTC | Price vs 50-day 13.3% vs 7.9%; vs 200-day 30.8% vs 5.3% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 54 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | QCOM | Target upside -3.1% vs 11.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ESTC and QCOM 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 moderate at 9 points.
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 QCOM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10QCOM lead: Reversed — ESTC led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; QCOM now leads by 9.
- Today
- QCOM +9
- 65 vs 74
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 69 vs 69
- 30 sessions ago
- ESTC +7
- 72 vs 65
- 90 sessions ago
- ESTC +7
- 63 vs 56
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Jul 24 when ESTC moved ahead of QCOM.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (15.29%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
4 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.35%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
QCOM 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.11%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.88%, 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.
- 1ESTC closes the Momentum gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to QCOM's edge.
- 2ESTC generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3QCOM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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
QCOM leads on balance| Metric | ESTC | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.1% | -6.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -103.8% | -72.7% |
| Gross margin | 75.5% | 54.2% |
| Operating margin | -1.5% | 23.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 35.3% | 37.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | 0.55 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ESTC | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6.8% | 4.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 8.2% | 8.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 37.3% | -7.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 58% | 31.9% |
| Year to date | 10.7% | 3.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -9.6% | 10.4% |
Technicals
ESTC has the stronger structure| Metric | ESTC | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.9 | 75 |
| ADX (14) | 38 | 18.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 13.3% | 7.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 30.8% | 5.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 95.3% | 25.8% |
Risk
Split| Metric | ESTC | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.94 | 2.02 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.06 | 0.39 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.09 | 0.57 |
| Max drawdown | -54.2% | -41.2% |
| Current drawdown | -16.4% | -29.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 57.4% | 51.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.3% | -4.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ESTC or QCOM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, QCOM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 74 against ESTC's 65. The edge comes from momentum and value. ESTC is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 ESTC or QCOM the better buy right now?
QCOM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor QCOM over ESTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. QCOM leads Momentum by 29 points; QCOM leads Value by 20 points; ESTC leads Quality by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ESTC or QCOM?
Analyst price targets imply -3.1% upside for ESTC and +11.6% for QCOM, so the Street currently favors QCOM. 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, ESTC or QCOM?
QCOM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. QCOM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 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, ESTC or QCOM?
QCOM 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, ESTC or QCOM?
QCOM on the Momentum factor, by 29 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, ESTC or QCOM?
QCOM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. QCOM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ESTC more profitable than QCOM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 75.5% vs 54.2%; operating margin -1.5% vs 23.2%; ttm roe 35.3% vs 37.3%. ESTC leads on one measure and QCOM 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 QCOM's lead over ESTC getting stronger or weaker?
QCOM lead: Reversed — ESTC led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; QCOM now leads by 9. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-24, when ESTC moved ahead of QCOM.
What would change the ESTC vs QCOM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ESTC closes the Momentum gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to QCOM's edge; ESTC generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; QCOM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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 ESTC and QCOM?
ESTC: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. QCOM: 4 bullish / 2 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 ESTC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On QCOM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ESTC and QCOM 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.