IBRX vs SNDK Stock Comparison
IBRX currently leads SNDK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 58 vs 56. The clearest difference is momentum, while SNDK has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between IBRX and SNDK?
IBRX leads the current stock comparison as ImmunityBio, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ImmunityBio, Inc. vs Sandisk Corporation
IBRX leads
IBRX leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum. Wall Street currently favors SNDK on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support IBRX, and its current signal state is conflicted.
ImmunityBio, Inc.
Sandisk Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors IBRX over SNDK, 58 versus 56 as of Oct 31, 2026. IBRX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while SNDK holds the stronger value profile. IBRX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors SNDK. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IBRX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. IBRX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ImmunityBio, Inc. and Sandisk Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare IBRX and SNDK 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.
- Momentum53 vs 20IBRX +33
- Value34 vs 50SNDK +16
- Risk Resilience28 vs 38SNDK +10
- Quality100 vs 100Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor IBRX. IBRX’s edge is concentrated in momentum; SNDK keeps a meaningful value 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 +14
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
IBRX's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — IBRX and SNDK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
IBRX (ImmunityBio, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
SNDK (Sandisk Corporation): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
IBRXIBRX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SNDKSNDK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SNDKSNDK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 points.
Momentum
IBRXIBRX on the Momentum factor, by 33 points.
Lower downside
SNDKSNDK on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
SNDKSNDK on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors IBRX, analyst targets favor SNDK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | IBRX | SNDK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +68.9% | +89.6% | SNDK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +28.6% | +89.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 14 | 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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IBRX. 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 | 58 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | SNDKon balance | revenue growth 15.9% vs 50.7%; EPS growth 64.5% vs 92.9%; TTM ROE 135% vs 93.1%; gross margin 94.6% vs 71.5%; operating margin -151.9% vs 61.2% — SNDK takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SNDK | Value 34 vs 50 |
| Technicals | IBRX | Price vs 50-day -4.6% vs -26.8%; vs 200-day 12.3% vs 12.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SNDK | Risk Resilience 28 vs 38 |
| Analyst expectations | SNDK | Target upside 68.9% vs 89.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of IBRX and SNDK 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 IBRX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28IBRX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- IBRX +2
- 58 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- SNDK +2
- 52 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 63 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- SNDK +6
- 65 vs 71
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Oct 22 when SNDK moved ahead of IBRX.
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 / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only IBRX
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bearish Crossover.
IBRX 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -5.15%, AIQ +4 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -13.47%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1SNDK closes the Momentum gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to IBRX's edge.
- 2SNDK's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3IBRX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
SNDK leads on balance| Metric | IBRX | SNDK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 15.9% | 50.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 64.5% | 92.9% |
| Gross margin | 94.6% | 71.5% |
| Operating margin | -151.9% | 61.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 135% | 93.1% |
| Debt to equity | -0.78 | 0.02 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | IBRX | SNDK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2% | 1.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6.7% | -19.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 18.3% | 9.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 26.6% | 32% |
| Year to date | 344.9% | 491.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 256.7% | 670% |
Technicals
IBRX has the stronger structure| Metric | IBRX | SNDK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 39.8 | 35.5 |
| ADX (14) | 24.8 | 24.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.6% | -26.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 12.3% | 12.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 84.7% | 66.7% |
Risk
SNDK is the more resilient| Metric | IBRX | SNDK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.61 | 4.02 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.61 | 2.37 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.3 | 4.11 |
| Max drawdown | -42.3% | -56.5% |
| Current drawdown | -23.7% | -39.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 107.2% | 112.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.4% | -10.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, IBRX or SNDK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, IBRX is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 58 against SNDK's 56. The edge comes from momentum. SNDK 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 IBRX or SNDK the better buy right now?
IBRX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor IBRX over SNDK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. IBRX leads Momentum by 33 points; SNDK leads Value by 16 points; SNDK leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, IBRX or SNDK?
Analyst price targets imply +68.9% upside for IBRX and +89.6% for SNDK, so the Street currently favors SNDK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors IBRX. 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, IBRX or SNDK?
SNDK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SNDK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 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, IBRX or SNDK?
SNDK 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, IBRX or SNDK?
IBRX on the Momentum factor, by 33 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, IBRX or SNDK?
SNDK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SNDK 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 IBRX more profitable than SNDK?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 94.6% vs 71.5%; operating margin -151.9% vs 61.2%; ttm roe 135% vs 93.1%. IBRX leads on two measures and SNDK 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 IBRX's lead over SNDK getting stronger or weaker?
IBRX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 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 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-22, when SNDK moved ahead of IBRX.
What would change the IBRX vs SNDK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SNDK closes the Momentum gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to IBRX's edge; SNDK's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; IBRX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 IBRX and SNDK?
IBRX: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. SNDK: 1 bullish / 1 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 IBRX is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SNDK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare IBRX and SNDK 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.