HLIT vs NOK Stock Comparison
HLIT currently leads NOK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 54 vs 49. The clearest difference is momentum, while NOK has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between HLIT and NOK?
HLIT leads the current stock comparison as Harmonic Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Harmonic Inc. vs Nokia Oyj
HLIT leads
HLIT leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from NOK. Wall Street currently favors NOK on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support HLIT, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Harmonic Inc.
Nokia Oyj
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HLIT over NOK, 54 versus 49 as of Oct 22, 2026. HLIT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while NOK holds the stronger quality profile. HLIT also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors NOK. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLIT today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. HLIT lead: Reversed — NOK led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HLIT now leads by 5.
Compare Harmonic Inc. and Nokia Oyj 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 HLIT and NOK 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.
- Momentum49 vs 30HLIT +19
- Risk Resilience56 vs 46HLIT +10
- Quality47 vs 52NOK +5
- Value65 vs 63Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor HLIT. HLIT’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; NOK keeps a meaningful quality 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 +3, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
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 5 active signals are unchanged.
HLIT's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HLIT and NOK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HLIT (Harmonic Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
NOK (Nokia Oyj): the counter-case, on quality, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 50.4% against 42.1%.
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
HLITHLIT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NOKNOK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
HLITHLIT on the Momentum factor, by 19 points.
Lower downside
HLITHLIT on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
NOKNOK on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors HLIT, analyst targets favor NOK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | HLIT | NOK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +53.1% | +89.2% | NOK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +24.3% | +28.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 2 | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLIT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | HLIT | 54 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | HLITon balance | revenue growth 9.7% vs 7.1%; EPS growth -128.6% vs -98.1%; TTM ROE -12.2% vs 4.5%; gross margin 50.7% vs 44.6%; operating margin 11.9% vs 8.3% — HLIT takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 65 vs 63 |
| Technicals | HLIT | Price vs 50-day -6.9% vs -9.5%; vs 200-day -4.2% vs -11% |
| Risk Resilience | HLIT | Risk Resilience 56 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | NOK | Target upside 53.1% vs 89.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HLIT and NOK 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 HLIT.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20HLIT lead: Reversed — NOK led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HLIT now leads by 5.
- Today
- HLIT +5
- 54 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- HLIT +1
- 51 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- NOK +7
- 49 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- HLIT +3
- 61 vs 58
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Oct 13 when HLIT moved ahead of NOK.
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 / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only HLIT
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.31%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only NOK
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.04%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
HLIT 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 -3.16%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.55%, 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.
- 1NOK closes the Momentum gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLIT's edge.
- 2NOK's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3HLIT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
HLIT leads on balance| Metric | HLIT | NOK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 9.7% | 7.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -128.6% | -98.1% |
| Gross margin | 50.7% | 44.6% |
| Operating margin | 11.9% | 8.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -12.2% | 4.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.36 | 0.16 |
Performance
HLIT leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | HLIT | NOK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5.2% | -8.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.9% | -16.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.7% | -12.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 2.4% | -11.7% |
| Year to date | 12% | 39.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 7.7% | 59.9% |
Technicals
HLIT has the stronger structure| Metric | HLIT | NOK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 58.3 | 37.2 |
| ADX (14) | 13.9 | 17.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.9% | -9.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4.2% | -11% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 42.1% | 50.4% |
Risk
HLIT is the more resilient| Metric | HLIT | NOK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.93 | 2.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.34 | 0.96 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.52 | 1.61 |
| Max drawdown | -41.5% | -50.1% |
| Current drawdown | -35.2% | -46.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 52.2% | 64.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.1% | -5.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HLIT or NOK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HLIT is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 54 against NOK's 49. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. NOK 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 HLIT or NOK the better buy right now?
HLIT carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 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 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor HLIT over NOK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HLIT leads Momentum by 19 points; HLIT leads Risk Resilience by 10 points; NOK leads Quality by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HLIT or NOK?
Analyst price targets imply +53.1% upside for HLIT and +89.2% for NOK, so the Street currently favors NOK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors HLIT. 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, HLIT or NOK?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, HLIT or NOK?
NOK 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, HLIT or NOK?
HLIT on the Momentum factor, by 19 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, HLIT or NOK?
HLIT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HLIT on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 HLIT more profitable than NOK?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 50.7% vs 44.6%; operating margin 11.9% vs 8.3%; ttm roe -12.2% vs 4.5%. HLIT leads on two measures and NOK on one measure, 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 HLIT's lead over NOK getting stronger or weaker?
HLIT lead: Reversed — NOK led by 7 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HLIT now leads by 5. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-13, when HLIT moved ahead of NOK.
What would change the HLIT vs NOK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NOK closes the Momentum gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLIT's edge; NOK's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; HLIT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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 HLIT and NOK?
HLIT: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. NOK: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 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 HLIT is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On NOK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare HLIT and NOK 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.