FLNC vs JKS Stock Comparison
Compare FLNC and JKS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between FLNC and JKS?
FLNC leads the current stock comparison as Fluence Energy, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Fluence Energy, Inc. vs JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd.
FLNC leads
FLNC leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from JKS.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support FLNC, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Fluence Energy, Inc.
JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors FLNC over JKS, 36 versus 31 as of Sep 11, 2026. FLNC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum. FLNC also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FLNC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. FLNC lead: Reversed — JKS led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FLNC now leads by 5.
Compare Fluence Energy, Inc. and JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd. 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 FLNC and JKS 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.
- Quality18 vs 2FLNC +16
- Momentum28 vs 24FLNC +4
- Risk Resilience28 vs 31Even
- Value64 vs 65Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor FLNC. FLNC’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum.
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 +1
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
FLNC's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FLNC and JKS both carry a full feed there.
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
FLNCFLNC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
FLNCFLNC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
FLNCFLNC on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
JKSJKS carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
FLNCFLNC 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 | FLNC | JKS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +77.8% | +61.6% | FLNC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +113.3% | +70.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 12 | 3 | 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 FLNC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | FLNC | 36 vs 31 |
| Fundamentals | FLNCon balance | EPS growth -50% vs -48.8%; TTM ROE -20.7% vs -21.5%; gross margin 9.2% vs 4.8%; operating margin -4.1% vs -7% — FLNC takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 64 vs 65 |
| Technicals | FLNC | Price vs 50-day -25.2% vs -24.7%; vs 200-day -43.7% vs -46.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 28 vs 31 |
| Analyst expectations | FLNC | Target upside 77.8% vs 61.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FLNC and JKS 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 narrow at 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 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 FLNC.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10FLNC lead: Reversed — JKS led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FLNC now leads by 5.
- Today
- FLNC +5
- 36 vs 31
- 7 sessions ago
- FLNC +4
- 35 vs 31
- 30 sessions ago
- JKS +7
- 37 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- FLNC +3
- 34 vs 31
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 11 when FLNC moved ahead of JKS.
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 / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (35.31%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 5 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (45.84%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
FLNC 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 +2.48%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.97%, 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.
- 1JKS closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to FLNC's edge.
- 2JKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3FLNC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
FLNC leads on balance| Metric | FLNC | JKS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 39.8% | 0.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -50% | -48.8% |
| Gross margin | 9.2% | 4.8% |
| Operating margin | -4.1% | -7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -20.7% | -21.5% |
| Debt to equity | 1.05 | 3.4 |
Performance
FLNC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | FLNC | JKS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -8.2% | -6.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -26.6% | -28.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -55.2% | -33.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -43.4% | -51.4% |
| Year to date | -47.6% | -52.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 34.4% | -52.6% |
Technicals
FLNC has the stronger structure| Metric | FLNC | JKS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 33.4 | 14.3 |
| ADX (14) | 27.1 | 34.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -25.2% | -24.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -43.7% | -46.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 61.7% | 59.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | FLNC | JKS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.28 | 1.83 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.86 | -0.94 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.5 | -1.49 |
| Max drawdown | -69.9% | -61.8% |
| Current drawdown | -69.9% | -61.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 127.7% | 62.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -9.5% | -6.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FLNC or JKS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, FLNC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 36 against JKS's 31. The edge comes from quality and momentum. 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 FLNC or JKS the better buy right now?
FLNC 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 AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor FLNC over JKS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. FLNC leads Quality by 16 points; FLNC leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FLNC or JKS?
Analyst price targets imply +77.8% upside for FLNC and +61.6% for JKS, so the Street currently favors FLNC. 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, FLNC or JKS?
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, FLNC or JKS?
FLNC 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, FLNC or JKS?
FLNC on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, FLNC or JKS?
JKS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JKS 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 FLNC more profitable than JKS?
FLNC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 9.2% vs 4.8%; operating margin -4.1% vs -7%; ttm roe -20.7% vs -21.5%.
Is FLNC's lead over JKS getting stronger or weaker?
FLNC lead: Reversed — JKS led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FLNC now leads by 5. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-11, when FLNC moved ahead of JKS.
What would change the FLNC vs JKS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JKS closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to FLNC's edge; JKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; FLNC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 FLNC and JKS?
FLNC: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. JKS: 1 bullish / 5 bearish / 2 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 FLNC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JKS it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare FLNC and JKS 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.