HLIO vs JPM Stock Comparison
JPM currently leads HLIO in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 49 vs 46. The clearest difference is momentum, while HLIO has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between HLIO 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
Helios Technologies, Inc. vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
JPM leads
JPM leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from HLIO. Wall Street currently favors HLIO on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support JPM, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Helios Technologies, Inc.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JPM over HLIO, 49 versus 46 as of Nov 7, 2026. JPM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while HLIO holds the stronger value profile. JPM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors HLIO. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JPM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. JPM lead: Reversed — HLIO led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 3.
Compare Helios Technologies, Inc. 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 HLIO 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.
- Momentum20 vs 51JPM +31
- Value56 vs 43HLIO +13
- Risk Resilience54 vs 61JPM +7
- Quality52 vs 46HLIO +6
3 of 6 evidence groups favor JPM. JPM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; HLIO keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-11-06, compared against the prior scored session 2026-11-05.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
JPM's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HLIO and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
HLIO (Helios Technologies, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, quality, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 60.4% against 26.8%.
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
HLIOHLIO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
HLIOHLIO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 points.
Momentum
JPMJPM on the Momentum factor, by 31 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
HLIOHLIO 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 HLIO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | HLIO | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +73.2% | +11.5% | HLIO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +71.8% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 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 | HLIO | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 0.00% | 9.04% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.360 | $3.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.360 | $5.550 |
| Years increased | 0 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #349 | #120 |
JPM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 9.04% a year against HLIO's 0.00%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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 | Even | 46 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | revenue growth 1.5% vs -7.6%; EPS growth 10% vs -27.6%; TTM ROE 7.6% vs 17.9%; gross margin 32.7% vs 63.2%; operating margin 10% vs 28.2% — JPM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | HLIO | Value 56 vs 43 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day -30.5% vs -2.1%; vs 200-day -17.3% vs 3.3% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 54 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | HLIO | Target upside 73.2% vs 11.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HLIO 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 3 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 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 · Jul 8 – Nov 6JPM lead: Reversed — HLIO led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 3.
- Today
- JPM +3
- 46 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 51 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- HLIO +6
- 53 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- JPM +2
- 50 vs 52
The lead changed hands 12 times in this window, most recently on Nov 4 when JPM moved ahead of HLIO.
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.
2 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only HLIO
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.38%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.83%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.56%)
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
HLIO 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -21.05%, AIQ -2 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.84%, 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.
- 1HLIO closes the Momentum gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to JPM's edge.
- 2HLIO'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 | HLIO | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.5% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 10% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 32.7% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 10% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.6% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | 3.32 |
Performance
JPM leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | HLIO | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -11.4% | -0.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -16.3% | 0.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -26.3% | -7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -7% | 10.7% |
| Year to date | -8.6% | 3.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -2.2% | 7.3% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | HLIO | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 18.9 | 50.7 |
| ADX (14) | 24.5 | 14.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -30.5% | -2.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -17.3% | 3.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 60.4% | 26.8% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | HLIO | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.47 | 0.8 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.23 | 0.23 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.29 | 0.32 |
| Max drawdown | -48.9% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -48.9% | -8.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 44.6% | 22.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HLIO or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, JPM is the stronger of the two as of Nov 7, 2026, scoring 49 against HLIO's 46. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. HLIO 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 HLIO or JPM the better buy right now?
JPM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Nov 7, 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 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor JPM over HLIO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JPM leads Momentum by 31 points; HLIO leads Value by 13 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HLIO or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +73.2% upside for HLIO and +11.5% for JPM, so the Street currently favors HLIO. 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, HLIO or JPM?
HLIO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. HLIO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 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, HLIO or JPM?
HLIO 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, HLIO or JPM?
JPM on the Momentum factor, by 31 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, HLIO or JPM?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 HLIO more profitable than JPM?
JPM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 32.7% vs 63.2%; operating margin 10% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 7.6% vs 17.9%.
Is JPM's lead over HLIO getting stronger or weaker?
JPM lead: Reversed — HLIO led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 3. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-08 and 2026-11-06. The lead has changed hands 12 times in that window, most recently on 2026-11-04, when JPM moved ahead of HLIO.
What would change the HLIO vs JPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HLIO closes the Momentum gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to JPM's edge; HLIO'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 HLIO and JPM?
HLIO: 2 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. JPM: 3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 HLIO is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare HLIO 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.