HLN vs JPM Stock Comparison
HLN currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 62 vs 53. The clearest difference is momentum, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between HLN and JPM?
HLN leads the current stock comparison as Haleon plc, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Haleon plc vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
HLN leads
HLN leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support HLN, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Haleon plc
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HLN over JPM, 62 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. HLN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. HLN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. HLN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Haleon plc 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 HLN 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.
- Risk Resilience47 vs 69JPM +22
- Momentum78 vs 61HLN +17
- Quality62 vs 46HLN +16
- Value56 vs 44HLN +12
3 of 6 evidence groups favor HLN. HLN’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
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 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
HLN's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — HLN and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HLN (Haleon plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
HLNHLN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HLNHLN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
HLNHLN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
HLNHLN on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 22 points.
Analyst upside
HLNHLN 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 | HLN | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +17.8% | +10.7% | HLN has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HLN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | HLN | 62 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | TTM ROE 9.9% vs 17.9%; gross margin 65.6% vs 63.2%; operating margin 21.4% vs 28.2% — JPM takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | HLN | Value 56 vs 44 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day -9.7% vs -2%; vs 200-day 2.3% vs 5.2% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 47 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | HLN | Target upside 17.8% vs 10.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of HLN 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 moderate at 9 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 HLN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28HLN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- HLN +9
- 62 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- HLN +12
- 62 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- HLN +7
- 51 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- HLN +8
- 60 vs 52
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 16 when HLN moved ahead of JPM.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only HLN
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.98%)
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.57%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
HLN 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 +1.05%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.9%, AIQ +1 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.
- 1JPM closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLN's edge.
- 2JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3HLN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
JPM leads on balance| Metric | HLN | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 65.6% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 21.4% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9.9% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.5 | 3.32 |
Performance
JPM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | HLN | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.2% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 11.1% | 2.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1.1% | -3.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.5% | 9.7% |
| Year to date | -1.1% | 5.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 8.1% | 12.9% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | HLN | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 69.5 | 60.9 |
| ADX (14) | 31.8 | 15 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.7% | -2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 2.3% | 5.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.9% | 13% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | HLN | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.12 | 0.73 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.34 | 0.41 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.59 | 0.56 |
| Max drawdown | -22.8% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -11.3% | -7.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 23.4% | 22% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, HLN or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HLN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 62 against JPM's 53. The edge comes from momentum and quality. JPM is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 HLN or JPM the better buy right now?
HLN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor HLN over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JPM leads Risk Resilience by 22 points; HLN leads Momentum by 17 points; HLN leads Quality by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, HLN or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +17.8% upside for HLN and +10.7% for JPM, so the Street currently favors HLN. 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, HLN or JPM?
HLN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. HLN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 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, HLN or JPM?
HLN 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, HLN or JPM?
HLN on the Momentum factor, by 17 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, HLN or JPM?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 22 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 HLN more profitable than JPM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 65.6% vs 63.2%; operating margin 21.4% vs 28.2%; ttm roe 9.9% vs 17.9%. HLN leads on one measure and JPM 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 HLN's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
HLN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-16, when HLN moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the HLN vs JPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to HLN's edge; JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; HLN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 HLN and JPM?
HLN: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. JPM: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 HLN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare HLN 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.