GILD vs GSK Stock Comparison
GSK currently leads GILD in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 66 vs 46. The clearest difference is quality, while GILD has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between GILD and GSK?
GSK leads the current stock comparison as GSK plc, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Gilead Sciences, Inc. vs GSK plc
GSK leads
GSK leads by 20 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, and the lead has widened from 15 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support GSK, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
GSK plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GSK over GILD, 66 versus 46 as of Oct 21, 2026. GSK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while GILD holds the stronger momentum profile. GSK also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GSK today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. GSK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 20 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Gilead Sciences, Inc. and GSK plc 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 GILD and GSK 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 vs 73GSK +43
- Value37 vs 67GSK +30
- Momentum74 vs 69GILD +5
- Risk Resilience46 vs 48Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor GSK. GSK’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; GILD keeps a meaningful momentum 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 +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +26
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
GSK's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — GILD and GSK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GSK (GSK plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
GILD (Gilead Sciences, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals.
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
GSKGSK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
GILDGILD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
GSKGSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 points.
Momentum
GILDGILD on the Momentum factor, by 5 points.
Lower downside
GSKGSK carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
GSKGSK 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 | GILD | GSK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -2.9% | +20% | GSK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +36.9% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | GILD | GSK |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 3.04% | -8.84% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.720 | $2.708 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $3.160 | $1.705 |
| Years increased | 5 | 3 |
| No cut in window | Yes | No (2) |
| Cohort rank | #305 | not ranked |
GILD grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 3.04% a year against GSK's -8.84%. GILD never reduced its regular dividend in the window; GSK did in 2 years.
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 GSK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | GSK | 46 vs 66 |
| Fundamentals | GILDon balance | revenue growth 12.1% vs 10.2%; EPS growth -6.2% vs -74.4%; TTM ROE -16.3% vs 28.3%; gross margin 79.6% vs 73.3%; operating margin -4.9% vs 24.1% — GILD takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | GSK | Value 37 vs 67 |
| Technicals | GILD | Price vs 50-day 4% vs 0.9%; vs 200-day 13.1% vs -3.3% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 46 vs 48 |
| Analyst expectations | GSK | Target upside -2.9% vs 20% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of GILD and GSK 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 wide at 20 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 GSK.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20GSK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 20 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GSK +20
- 46 vs 66
- 7 sessions ago
- GSK +14
- 45 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- GSK +15
- 46 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 55 vs 55
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 28 when GSK moved ahead of GILD.
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.
5 bullish / 0 bearish
Only GILD
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.76%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.9%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only GSK
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (5.62%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
GSK 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.88%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 6 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.2%, AIQ +6 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.
- 1GILD closes the Quality gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to GSK's edge.
- 2GILD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3GSK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
GILD leads on balance| Metric | GILD | GSK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 12.1% | 10.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -6.2% | -74.4% |
| Gross margin | 79.6% | 73.3% |
| Operating margin | -4.9% | 24.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -16.3% | 28.3% |
| Debt to equity | 2.22 | 1.03 |
Performance
GILD leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | GILD | GSK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5.8% | 9.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.5% | -0.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 20.1% | -0.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 17.4% | -9.8% |
| Year to date | 26.9% | 3.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 32.8% | 15.7% |
Technicals
GILD has the stronger structure| Metric | GILD | GSK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 61.6 | 65.1 |
| ADX (14) | 23.6 | 18.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4% | 0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 13.1% | -3.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.9% | 24.7% |
Risk
Split| Metric | GILD | GSK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.3 | 0.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.9 | 0.52 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.71 | 0.9 |
| Max drawdown | -22% | -24.4% |
| Current drawdown | -0.6% | -17.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.8% | 26.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, GILD or GSK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GSK is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 66 against GILD's 46. The edge comes from quality and value. GILD is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 GILD or GSK the better buy right now?
GSK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 GSK over GILD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. GSK leads Quality by 43 points; GSK leads Value by 30 points; GILD leads Momentum by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, GILD or GSK?
Analyst price targets imply -2.9% upside for GILD and +20% for GSK, so the Street currently favors GSK. 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, GILD or GSK?
GSK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 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, GILD or GSK?
GILD 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, GILD or GSK?
GILD on the Momentum factor, by 5 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, GILD or GSK?
GSK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GSK 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 GILD more profitable than GSK?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 79.6% vs 73.3%; operating margin -4.9% vs 24.1%; ttm roe -16.3% vs 28.3%. GILD leads on one measure and GSK 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 GSK's lead over GILD getting stronger or weaker?
GSK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 20 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-28, when GSK moved ahead of GILD.
What would change the GILD vs GSK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: GILD closes the Quality gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to GSK's edge; GILD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; GSK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 GILD and GSK?
GILD: 5 bullish / 0 bearish. GSK: 2 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 GILD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On GSK it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare GILD and GSK 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.