SPY vs GME Stock Comparison
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF vs GameStop Corp.
SPY leads
SPY leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 28 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 3 of 4 evidence groups support SPY, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
GameStop Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPY over GME, 62 versus 49 as of Sep 3, 2026. SPY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while GME 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's advantage has been narrowing. SPY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 28 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF and GameStop Corp. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
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%84 vs 48SPY +36
- Risk Resilience15%89 vs 57SPY +32
- Value30%39 vs 49GME +10
- Momentum25%47 vs 46Even
3 of 4 evidence groups favor SPY. SPY’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; GME keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-02, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-01.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
SPY's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SPY and GME 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 quality and risk resilience.
GME (GameStop Corp.): the counter-case, on value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 22.9% against 7.2%.
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 at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
GMEGME on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
SPYSPY on Risk Resilience, by 32 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 | SPY | GME | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | — | -39.4% | Level |
| Target dispersion | — | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | — | — | 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 | 62 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | GME | Value 39 vs 49 |
| Technicals | SPY | Price vs 50-day 1.4% vs -7%; vs 200-day 7.2% vs -15.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SPY | Risk Resilience 89 vs 57 |
| 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 SPY and GME 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 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 · Apr 21 – Sep 2SPY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 28 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SPY +13
- 62 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- SPY +21
- 64 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +28
- 70 vs 42
- 90 sessions ago
- SPY +11
- 58 vs 47
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.20%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.9%)
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.90%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.3%)
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 +0.44%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.85%, 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.
- 1GME closes the Quality gap — currently 36 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPY's edge.
- 2GME's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3SPY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 15 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate SPY's advantage entirely.
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 | SPY | GME |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | — | -24.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | — | 210.7% |
| Gross margin | — | 34.4% |
| Operating margin | — | 10.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | — | 14% |
| Debt to equity | — | 0.74 |
Technicals
SPY has the stronger structure| Metric | SPY | GME |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38.4 | 54.5 |
| ADX (14) | 14.2 | 32.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.4% | -7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7.2% | -15.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 7.2% | 22.9% |
Risk
SPY is the more resilient| Metric | SPY | GME |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1 | 0.63 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.06 | -0.38 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.51 | -0.54 |
| Max drawdown | -9.1% | -35.5% |
| Current drawdown | -2.1% | -32.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 12.8% | 37.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.4% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SPY or GME?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SPY is the stronger of the two as of Sep 3, 2026, scoring 62 against GME's 49. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. GME 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 SPY or GME the better buy right now?
SPY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 3, 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 GME?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. SPY leads Quality by 36 points; SPY leads Risk Resilience by 32 points; GME leads Value by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SPY or GME?
Analyst price targets imply not covered upside for SPY and -39.4% for GME. 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, SPY or GME?
GME is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GME on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, SPY or GME?
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, SPY or GME?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, SPY or GME?
SPY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPY on Risk Resilience, by 32 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is SPY more profitable than GME?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is SPY's lead over GME getting stronger or weaker?
SPY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 28 to 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-21 and 2026-09-02. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the SPY vs GME verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: GME closes the Quality gap — currently 36 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPY's edge; GME's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; SPY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 15 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate SPY's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about SPY and GME?
SPY: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. GME: 1 bullish / 3 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 SPY is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On GME it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
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.