NOW vs IBM Stock Comparison
Compare NOW and IBM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between NOW and IBM?
IBM leads the current stock comparison as International Business Machines Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ServiceNow, Inc. vs International Business Machines Corporation
IBM leads
IBM leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience.
Fragile: 5 of 6 evidence groups support IBM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
ServiceNow, Inc.
International Business Machines Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors IBM over NOW, 57 versus 51 as of Sep 11, 2026. IBM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while NOW holds the stronger momentum profile. IBM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IBM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. IBM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ServiceNow, Inc. and International Business Machines Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare NOW and IBM 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.
- Value37 vs 67IBM +30
- Momentum58 vs 44NOW +14
- Risk Resilience39 vs 48IBM +9
- Quality64 vs 61Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor IBM. IBM’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; NOW keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -16
New signals
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
IBM's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NOW and IBM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
IBM (International Business Machines Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
NOW (ServiceNow, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 65.4% against 29.3%.
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
IBMIBM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
IBMIBM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
IBMIBM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 points.
Momentum
NOWNOW on the Momentum factor, by 14 points.
Lower downside
IBMIBM on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
IBMIBM 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 | NOW | IBM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +6.1% | +10.2% | IBM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +115.9% | +65.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 23 | 13 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IBM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | IBM | 51 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | IBMon balance | revenue growth 5.8% vs 7.8%; EPS growth -35.6% vs 76.9%; TTM ROE 13.8% vs 33.5%; gross margin 74.8% vs 58.4%; operating margin 11.4% vs 17.9% — IBM takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | IBM | Value 37 vs 67 |
| Technicals | NOW | Price vs 50-day 11.4% vs 1.9%; vs 200-day 11% vs -10.5% |
| Risk Resilience | IBM | Risk Resilience 39 vs 48 |
| Analyst expectations | IBM | Target upside 6.1% vs 10.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NOW and IBM 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 6 points.
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 IBM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10IBM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- IBM +6
- 51 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- IBM +1
- 57 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- IBM +4
- 57 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- IBM +12
- 54 vs 66
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when IBM moved ahead of NOW.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.73%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (9.48%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
IBM 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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.04%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +3.96%, AIQ -4 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.
- 1NOW closes the Value gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to IBM's edge.
- 2NOW generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3IBM'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
IBM leads on balance| Metric | NOW | IBM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.8% | 7.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -35.6% | 76.9% |
| Gross margin | 74.8% | 58.4% |
| Operating margin | 11.4% | 17.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.8% | 33.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.68 | 1.89 |
Performance
NOW leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | NOW | IBM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.1% | 1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 5% | -0.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 23.7% | -14.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 13.4% | -6% |
| Year to date | -14.4% | -21% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -30.2% | -8.6% |
Technicals
NOW has the stronger structure| Metric | NOW | IBM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.2 | 50.3 |
| ADX (14) | 23.8 | 9.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 11.4% | 1.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 11% | -10.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 65.4% | 29.3% |
Risk
IBM is the more resilient| Metric | NOW | IBM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.7 | 0.88 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.41 | -0.04 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.58 | -0.04 |
| Max drawdown | -56.8% | -37.5% |
| Current drawdown | -31.8% | -28.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 56.9% | 48.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.8% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NOW or IBM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, IBM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 57 against NOW's 51. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. NOW 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 NOW or IBM the better buy right now?
IBM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor IBM over NOW?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. IBM leads Value by 30 points; NOW leads Momentum by 14 points; IBM leads Risk Resilience by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NOW or IBM?
Analyst price targets imply +6.1% upside for NOW and +10.2% for IBM, so the Street currently favors IBM. 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, NOW or IBM?
IBM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. IBM 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, NOW or IBM?
IBM 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, NOW or IBM?
NOW on the Momentum factor, by 14 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, NOW or IBM?
IBM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. IBM on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 NOW more profitable than IBM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 74.8% vs 58.4%; operating margin 11.4% vs 17.9%; ttm roe 13.8% vs 33.5%. NOW leads on one measure and IBM 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 IBM's lead over NOW getting stronger or weaker?
IBM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-02, when IBM moved ahead of NOW.
What would change the NOW vs IBM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NOW closes the Value gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to IBM's edge; NOW generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; IBM'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 NOW and IBM?
NOW: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. IBM: 1 bullish / 2 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 NOW is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On IBM it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare NOW and IBM 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.