FSM vs SPY Stock Comparison
SPY currently leads FSM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 66 vs 57. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while FSM has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between FSM and SPY?
SPY leads the current stock comparison as State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF, with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Fortuna Mining Corp. vs State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
SPY leads
SPY leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 3 of 4 evidence groups support SPY, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Fortuna Mining Corp.
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPY over FSM, 66 versus 57 as of Oct 21, 2026. SPY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while FSM holds the stronger value profile. SPY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPY today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. SPY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Fortuna Mining Corp. and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF 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 FSM and SPY 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.
- Risk Resilience41 vs 88SPY +47
- Momentum39 vs 63SPY +24
- Value60 vs 41FSM +19
- Quality76 vs 84SPY +8
3 of 4 evidence groups favor SPY. SPY’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; FSM 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 -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +16
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
SPY's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FSM and SPY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SPY (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
FSM (Fortuna Mining Corp.): the counter-case, on value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 51.2% against 9%.
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
SPYSPY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
FSMFSM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 points.
Momentum
SPYSPY on the Momentum factor, by 24 points.
Lower downside
SPYSPY on Risk Resilience, by 47 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | FSM | SPY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +40.2% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | 0% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SPY | 57 vs 66 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | FSM | Value 60 vs 41 |
| Technicals | SPY | Price vs 50-day -9.7% vs 0.6%; vs 200-day 0.4% vs 5.9% |
| Risk Resilience | SPY | Risk Resilience 41 vs 88 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FSM and SPY 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 9 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (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 SPY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SPY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SPY +9
- 57 vs 66
- 7 sessions ago
- SPY +10
- 56 vs 66
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +6
- 60 vs 66
- 90 sessions ago
- SPY +3
- 67 vs 70
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 17 when SPY moved ahead of FSM.
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 / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only FSM
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.20%)
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SPY
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.92%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.2%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
SPY 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 -0.48%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.53%, AIQ +4 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.
- 1FSM closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 47 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPY's edge.
- 2FSM's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3SPY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 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
Split| Metric | FSM | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -30.6% | — |
| Gross margin | 57.1% | — |
| Operating margin | 52.5% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 22.2% | — |
| Debt to equity | 0.13 | — |
Performance
SPY leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | FSM | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.8% | -1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -14.9% | -0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 20.7% | 2.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.1% | 9.2% |
| Year to date | 5.9% | 12.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 9.6% | 16.4% |
Technicals
SPY has the stronger structure| Metric | FSM | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38.7 | 56.2 |
| ADX (14) | 22.1 | 12.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.7% | 0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.4% | 5.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 51.2% | 9% |
Risk
SPY is the more resilient| Metric | FSM | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.1 | 1 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.53 | 0.91 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.79 | 1.39 |
| Max drawdown | -41.2% | -9.1% |
| Current drawdown | -23.9% | -1.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 58% | 12.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.6% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FSM or SPY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SPY is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 66 against FSM's 57. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. FSM 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 FSM or SPY the better buy right now?
SPY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 4 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 SPY over FSM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SPY leads Risk Resilience by 47 points; SPY leads Momentum by 24 points; FSM leads Value by 19 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FSM or SPY?
Analyst price targets imply +40.2% upside for FSM and not covered for SPY. 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, FSM or SPY?
FSM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FSM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 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, FSM or SPY?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, FSM or SPY?
SPY on the Momentum factor, by 24 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, FSM or SPY?
SPY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPY on Risk Resilience, by 47 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 FSM more profitable than SPY?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is SPY's lead over FSM getting stronger or weaker?
SPY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 9 points over 30 sessions. 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 2026-09-17, when SPY moved ahead of FSM.
What would change the FSM vs SPY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FSM closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 47 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPY's edge; FSM's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; SPY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 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 FSM and SPY?
FSM: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. SPY: 4 bullish / 1 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 FSM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SPY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
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.