FIBK vs JPM Stock Comparison
JPM currently leads FIBK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 45. The clearest difference is momentum, while FIBK has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between FIBK and JPM?
JPM leads the current stock comparison as JPMorgan Chase & Co., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
First Interstate BancSystem, Inc. vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
JPM leads
JPM leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from FIBK.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support JPM, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
First Interstate BancSystem, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JPM over FIBK, 52 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. JPM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while FIBK holds the stronger value profile. JPM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JPM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. JPM lead: Reversed — FIBK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 7.
Compare First Interstate BancSystem, 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 FIBK 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.
- Momentum40 vs 58JPM +18
- Quality37 vs 46JPM +9
- Risk Resilience62 vs 68JPM +6
- Value48 vs 44FIBK +4
4 of 6 evidence groups favor JPM. JPM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; FIBK keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +13
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
JPM's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FIBK and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
FIBK (First Interstate BancSystem, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, fundamentals, 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
JPMJPM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
FIBKFIBK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
FIBKFIBK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
JPMJPM on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
JPMJPM 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 | FIBK | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +0.2% | +11.3% | JPM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +16.8% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | FIBK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 6.07% | 9.04% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.400 | $3.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.880 | $5.550 |
| Years increased | 3 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #209 | #120 |
JPM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 9.04% a year against FIBK's 6.07%. 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JPM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | JPM | 45 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | FIBKon balance | revenue growth -74.6% vs -7.6%; EPS growth 42.6% vs -27.6%; TTM ROE 9.6% vs 17.9%; gross margin 105.2% vs 63.2%; operating margin 43.8% vs 28.2% — FIBK takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | FIBK | Value 48 vs 44 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day -2.7% vs -3.4%; vs 200-day -1.9% vs 4% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 62 vs 68 |
| Analyst expectations | JPM | Target upside 0.2% vs 11.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FIBK 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 moderate at 7 points.
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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)
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 JPM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20JPM lead: Reversed — FIBK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 7.
- Today
- JPM +7
- 45 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- JPM +6
- 41 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- FIBK +1
- 44 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- JPM +1
- 52 vs 53
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 16 when FIBK 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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only FIBK
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
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 +0.31%, AIQ +3 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.02%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1FIBK closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to JPM's edge.
- 2FIBK's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3JPM'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
FIBK leads on balance| Metric | FIBK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -74.6% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 42.6% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 105.2% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 43.8% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9.6% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.23 | 3.32 |
Performance
JPM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | FIBK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.4% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.7% | -1.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.4% | -3.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.9% | 7.1% |
| Year to date | 2.8% | 4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 21.3% | 12.3% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | FIBK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.9 | 57.4 |
| ADX (14) | 27.6 | 20.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.7% | -3.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1.9% | 4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.5% | 14.8% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | FIBK | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.83 | 0.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.66 | 0.47 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.99 | 0.66 |
| Max drawdown | -17.9% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -11.6% | -8.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 25.1% | 22.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.3% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FIBK or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, JPM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 52 against FIBK's 45. The edge comes from momentum and quality. FIBK 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 FIBK or JPM the better buy right now?
JPM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 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 JPM over FIBK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JPM leads Momentum by 18 points; JPM leads Quality by 9 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FIBK or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +0.2% upside for FIBK and +11.3% for JPM, so the Street currently favors JPM. 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, FIBK or JPM?
FIBK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FIBK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 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, FIBK or JPM?
FIBK 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, FIBK or JPM?
JPM on the Momentum factor, by 18 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, FIBK or JPM?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM 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 FIBK more profitable than JPM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 105.2% vs 63.2%; operating margin 43.8% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 9.6% vs 17.9%. FIBK 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 JPM's lead over FIBK getting stronger or weaker?
JPM lead: Reversed — FIBK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 7. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-16, when FIBK moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the FIBK vs JPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FIBK closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to JPM's edge; FIBK's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; JPM'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 FIBK and JPM?
FIBK: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. JPM: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. The most decision-relevant rule on FIBK is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare FIBK 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.