FSK vs MAIN Stock Comparison
Compare FSK and MAIN across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between FSK and MAIN?
FSK leads the current stock comparison as FS KKR Capital Corp., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
FS KKR Capital Corp. vs Main Street Capital Corporation
FSK leads
FSK leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from MAIN.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support FSK, and the lead recently changed hands.
FS KKR Capital Corp.
Main Street Capital Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors FSK over MAIN, 57 versus 53 as of Sep 6, 2026. FSK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while MAIN holds the stronger quality profile. FSK also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FSK today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. FSK lead: Reversed — MAIN led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FSK now leads by 4.
Compare FS KKR Capital Corp. and Main Street Capital Corporation 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 FSK and MAIN 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.
- Quality30%39 vs 63MAIN +24
- Value30%58 vs 38FSK +20
- Momentum25%76 vs 56FSK +20
- Risk Resilience15%60 vs 61Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor FSK. FSK’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; MAIN keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
FSK's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FSK and MAIN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
FSK (FS KKR Capital Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
MAIN (Main Street Capital Corporation): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals.
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
FSKFSK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
FSKFSK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
FSKFSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
FSKFSK on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
MAINMAIN carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
FSKFSK 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 | FSK | MAIN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -3.5% | -5.3% | FSK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +16.7% | +14.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 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 FSK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | FSK | 57 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | MAINon balance | revenue growth 176.2% vs -8.5%; EPS growth 91.7% vs 192.6%; TTM ROE -6.7% vs 14.8%; gross margin 60.5% vs 85.3% — MAIN takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | FSK | Value 58 vs 38 |
| Technicals | FSK | Price vs 50-day 9.3% vs 3.6%; vs 200-day 2.1% vs 2.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 60 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | FSK | Target upside -3.5% vs -5.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FSK and MAIN 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 4 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)
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 FSK.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5FSK lead: Reversed — MAIN led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FSK now leads by 4.
- Today
- FSK +4
- 57 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- FSK +1
- 55 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- MAIN +3
- 55 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- MAIN +3
- 47 vs 50
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Aug 31 when FSK moved ahead of MAIN.
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.57%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.44%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
MAIN 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.89%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.67%, 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.
- 1MAIN closes the Value gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to FSK's edge.
- 2MAIN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3FSK starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
MAIN leads on balance| Metric | FSK | MAIN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 176.2% | -8.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 91.7% | 192.6% |
| Gross margin | 60.5% | 85.3% |
| Operating margin | -0.3% | 64.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -6.7% | 14.8% |
| Debt to equity | 1.23 | 0.8 |
Performance
FSK leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | FSK | MAIN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.5% | -1.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0% | -2.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 14.2% | 11.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 13.7% | 0.5% |
| Year to date | -16% | -4.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -31.1% | -12.1% |
Technicals
FSK has the stronger structure| Metric | FSK | MAIN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 67.2 | 44.6 |
| ADX (14) | 32.2 | 27.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 9.3% | 3.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 2.1% | 2.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 23.9% | 12.7% |
Risk
Split| Metric | FSK | MAIN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.82 | 0.77 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.07 | -0.58 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.41 | -0.82 |
| Max drawdown | -45.3% | -26.1% |
| Current drawdown | -31.4% | -14.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 33.2% | 25.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FSK or MAIN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, FSK is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 57 against MAIN's 53. The edge comes from value and momentum. MAIN 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 FSK or MAIN the better buy right now?
FSK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor FSK over MAIN?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. MAIN leads Quality by 24 points; FSK leads Value by 20 points; FSK leads Momentum by 20 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FSK or MAIN?
Analyst price targets imply -3.5% upside for FSK and -5.3% for MAIN, so the Street currently favors FSK. 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, FSK or MAIN?
FSK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FSK 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, FSK or MAIN?
FSK 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, FSK or MAIN?
FSK on the Momentum factor, by 20 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, FSK or MAIN?
MAIN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MAIN carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is FSK more profitable than MAIN?
MAIN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 60.5% vs 85.3%; operating margin -0.3% vs 64.7%; ttm roe -6.7% vs 14.8%.
Is FSK's lead over MAIN getting stronger or weaker?
FSK lead: Reversed — MAIN led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; FSK now leads by 4. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-31, when FSK moved ahead of MAIN.
What would change the FSK vs MAIN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MAIN closes the Value gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to FSK's edge; MAIN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; FSK starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about FSK and MAIN?
FSK: 0 bullish / 2 bearish. MAIN: 1 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 FSK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On MAIN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare FSK and MAIN with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.