EVR vs JPM Stock Comparison
EVR currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 68 vs 53. The clearest difference is quality, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between EVR and JPM?
EVR leads the current stock comparison as Evercore Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Evercore Inc. vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
EVR leads
EVR leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 20 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support EVR, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Evercore Inc.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EVR over JPM, 68 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. EVR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. EVR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EVR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. EVR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Evercore 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 EVR 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.
- Quality91 vs 46EVR +45
- Risk Resilience51 vs 69JPM +18
- Momentum78 vs 61EVR +17
- Value46 vs 44Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor EVR. EVR’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +39
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.60%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
EVR's lead widened by 7 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — EVR and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EVR (Evercore Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, technicals.
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
EVREVR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
JPMJPM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EVREVR on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 18 points.
Analyst upside
EVREVR 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 | EVR | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +69.7% | +10.7% | EVR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +158.2% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | EVR | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 7.16% | 9.04% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.350 | $3.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $3.320 | $5.550 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #183 | #120 |
JPM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 9.04% a year against EVR's 7.16%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EVR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | EVR | 68 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | revenue growth -28.7% vs -7.6%; EPS growth -68% vs -27.6%; TTM ROE 39.8% vs 17.9%; gross margin 98.5% vs 63.2%; operating margin 22.1% vs 28.2% — JPM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 46 vs 44 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day 6.9% vs -2%; vs 200-day -7.6% vs 5.2% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 51 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | EVR | Target upside 69.7% vs 10.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of EVR and JPM 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 wide at 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 EVR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28EVR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- EVR +15
- 68 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- EVR +8
- 58 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- EVR +20
- 64 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- EVR +6
- 58 vs 52
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Aug 13 when EVR moved ahead of JPM.
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.
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only EVR
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (16.50%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.60%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.57%)
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: BB Upper Band Breach, MACD Bullish Crossover.
EVR 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 8 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -2.38%, AIQ +8 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.9%, 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.
- 1JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to EVR's edge.
- 2JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3EVR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 15-point move would eliminate EVR'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
JPM leads on balance| Metric | EVR | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -28.7% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -68% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 98.5% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 22.1% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 39.8% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.59 | 3.32 |
Performance
JPM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | EVR | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 11.2% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 13.5% | 2.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -6.5% | -3.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -9.8% | 9.7% |
| Year to date | -14.1% | 5.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -9.8% | 12.9% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | EVR | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 65 | 60.9 |
| ADX (14) | 29.6 | 15 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.9% | -2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -7.6% | 5.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 51.2% | 13% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | EVR | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.75 | 0.73 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.15 | 0.41 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.2 | 0.56 |
| Max drawdown | -35.3% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -23.7% | -7.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 39.4% | 22% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.1% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, EVR or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EVR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 68 against JPM's 53. The edge comes from quality and momentum. 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 EVR or JPM the better buy right now?
EVR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor EVR over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. EVR leads Quality by 45 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 18 points; EVR leads Momentum by 17 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, EVR or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +69.7% upside for EVR and +10.7% for JPM, so the Street currently favors EVR. 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, EVR or JPM?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, EVR or JPM?
JPM 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, EVR or JPM?
EVR on the Momentum factor, by 17 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, EVR or JPM?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 18 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 EVR more profitable than JPM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 98.5% vs 63.2%; operating margin 22.1% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 39.8% vs 17.9%. EVR leads on two measures and JPM 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 EVR's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
EVR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-08-13, when EVR moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the EVR vs JPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to EVR's edge; JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; EVR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 15-point move would eliminate EVR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about EVR and JPM?
EVR: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. JPM: 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 EVR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare EVR 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.