FRT vs JPM Stock Comparison
JPM currently leads FRT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 47. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between FRT 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
Federal Realty Investment Trust vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
JPM leads
JPM leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from FRT. Wall Street currently favors FRT on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support JPM, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Federal Realty Investment Trust
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JPM over FRT, 52 versus 47 as of Oct 21, 2026. JPM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum. JPM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors FRT. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JPM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. JPM lead: Reversed — FRT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 5.
Compare Federal Realty Investment Trust 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 FRT 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.
- Momentum36 vs 58JPM +22
- Value46 vs 44Even
- Quality46 vs 46Even
- Risk Resilience68 vs 68Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor JPM. JPM’s edge is concentrated in momentum.
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 +10
New signals
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, 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 — FRT and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
FRT (Federal Realty Investment Trust): the counter-case, on 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
JPMJPM 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
JPMJPM on the Momentum factor, by 22 points.
Lower downside
FRTFRT carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
FRTFRT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors JPM, analyst targets favor FRT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | FRT | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.7% | +11.3% | FRT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +31.1% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | FRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 0.98% | 9.04% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $4.220 | $3.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $4.430 | $5.550 |
| Years increased | 4 | 5 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #120 |
JPM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 9.04% a year against FRT's 0.98%. JPM never reduced its regular dividend in the window; FRT did in 1 year. They are ranked in different cohorts — REITs and US dividend-paying corporations — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
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
3 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 | 47 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | revenue growth -1.6% vs -7.6%; EPS growth -45.6% vs -27.6%; TTM ROE 13.3% vs 17.9%; gross margin 54% vs 63.2%; operating margin 34.5% 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 -5.9% vs -3.4%; vs 200-day -5.5% vs 4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 68 vs 68 |
| Analyst expectations | FRT | Target upside 18.7% vs 11.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FRT 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 narrow at 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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'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 — FRT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 5.
- Today
- JPM +5
- 47 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- JPM +3
- 44 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- FRT +1
- 44 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- JPM +7
- 46 vs 53
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 9 when JPM moved ahead of FRT.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only FRT
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.34%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.65%)
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
FRT is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.71%, 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.
- 1FRT closes the Momentum gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to JPM's edge.
- 2FRT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 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
JPM leads on balance| Metric | FRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -1.6% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -45.6% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 54% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 34.5% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.3% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 1.44 | 3.32 |
Performance
JPM leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | FRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.7% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.6% | -1.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.8% | -3.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -4.1% | 7.1% |
| Year to date | 5.7% | 4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 8.7% | 12.3% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | FRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 42.1 | 57.4 |
| ADX (14) | 43.1 | 20.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.9% | -3.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -5.5% | 4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13.2% | 14.8% |
Risk
Split| Metric | FRT | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.11 | 0.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.29 | 0.47 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.46 | 0.66 |
| Max drawdown | -17.6% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -16.2% | -8.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 16.6% | 22.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.6% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FRT or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, JPM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 52 against FRT's 47. The edge comes from 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 FRT or JPM the better buy right now?
JPM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 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 JPM over FRT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JPM leads Momentum by 22 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FRT or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +18.7% upside for FRT and +11.3% for JPM, so the Street currently favors FRT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors JPM. 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, FRT 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, FRT 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, FRT or JPM?
JPM on the Momentum factor, by 22 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, FRT or JPM?
FRT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. FRT 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 FRT more profitable than JPM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 54% vs 63.2%; operating margin 34.5% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 13.3% vs 17.9%. FRT leads on one measure and JPM 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 JPM's lead over FRT getting stronger or weaker?
JPM lead: Reversed — FRT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 5. 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 2026-09-09, when JPM moved ahead of FRT.
What would change the FRT vs JPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FRT closes the Momentum gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to JPM's edge; FRT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; 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 FRT and JPM?
FRT: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. JPM: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. 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 FRT is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare FRT 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.