IDCC vs KKR Stock Comparison
Compare IDCC and KKR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between IDCC and KKR?
IDCC leads the current stock comparison as InterDigital, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
InterDigital, Inc. vs KKR & Co. Inc.
IDCC leads
IDCC leads by 28 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 21 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors KKR on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support IDCC, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
InterDigital, Inc.
KKR & Co. Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors IDCC over KKR, 63 versus 35 as of Sep 11, 2026. IDCC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum. IDCC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors KKR. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IDCC today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. IDCC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 21 to 28 points over 30 sessions. IDCC leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare InterDigital, Inc. and KKR & Co. Inc. 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 IDCC and KKR 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.
- Quality82 vs 37IDCC +45
- Momentum59 vs 26IDCC +33
- Value50 vs 30IDCC +20
- Risk Resilience57 vs 53IDCC +4
5 of 6 evidence groups favor IDCC. IDCC’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum.
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 +9
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -14
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.53%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
IDCC's lead widened by 6 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — IDCC and KKR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
IDCC (InterDigital, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
KKR (KKR & Co. Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations.
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
IDCCIDCC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
KKRKKR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
IDCCIDCC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
IDCCIDCC on the Momentum factor, by 33 points.
Lower downside
IDCCIDCC on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
KKRKKR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors IDCC, analyst targets favor KKR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | IDCC | KKR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +21.4% | +25.6% | KKR has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +32.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 9 | 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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IDCC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | IDCC | 63 vs 35 |
| Fundamentals | IDCCon balance | revenue growth 26.7% vs 53.2%; EPS growth 53.9% vs 80.5%; TTM ROE 26.8% vs 10.3%; gross margin 78.7% vs 46.5%; operating margin 43.8% vs 17.6% — IDCC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | IDCC | Value 50 vs 30 |
| Technicals | IDCC | Price vs 50-day 13.8% vs -2.2%; vs 200-day 8.6% vs -4.4% |
| Risk Resilience | IDCC | Risk Resilience 57 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | KKR | Target upside 21.4% vs 25.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of IDCC and KKR and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 28 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 IDCC.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10IDCC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 21 to 28 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- IDCC +28
- 63 vs 35
- 7 sessions ago
- IDCC +16
- 59 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- IDCC +21
- 67 vs 46
- 90 sessions ago
- IDCC +17
- 55 vs 38
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.65%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.05%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
IDCC 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.07%, AIQ +3 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.21%, AIQ -3 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.
- 1KKR closes the Quality gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to IDCC's edge.
- 2KKR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3IDCC'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
IDCC leads on balance| Metric | IDCC | KKR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 26.7% | 53.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 53.9% | 80.5% |
| Gross margin | 78.7% | 46.5% |
| Operating margin | 43.8% | 17.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 26.8% | 10.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.33 | 1.63 |
Performance
IDCC leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | IDCC | KKR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5% | -5.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.4% | -9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 36.4% | 6.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -5.9% | 15.8% |
| Year to date | 8.8% | -20.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 15.5% | -27.3% |
Technicals
IDCC has the stronger structure| Metric | IDCC | KKR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.6 | 35.9 |
| ADX (14) | 25.5 | 16.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 13.8% | -2.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8.6% | -4.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 31.8% | 36.1% |
Risk
IDCC is the more resilient| Metric | IDCC | KKR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.38 | 1.5 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.42 | -0.7 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.6 | -0.98 |
| Max drawdown | -36.8% | -43.8% |
| Current drawdown | -12.6% | -32.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.1% | 39% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.3% | -4.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, IDCC or KKR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, IDCC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 63 against KKR's 35. The edge comes from quality and momentum. 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 IDCC or KKR the better buy right now?
IDCC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor IDCC over KKR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. IDCC leads Quality by 45 points; IDCC leads Momentum by 33 points; IDCC leads Value by 20 points. IDCC leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by KKR simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, IDCC or KKR?
Analyst price targets imply +21.4% upside for IDCC and +25.6% for KKR, so the Street currently favors KKR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors IDCC. 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, IDCC or KKR?
IDCC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. IDCC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 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, IDCC or KKR?
KKR 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, IDCC or KKR?
IDCC 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, IDCC or KKR?
IDCC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. IDCC on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 IDCC more profitable than KKR?
IDCC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 78.7% vs 46.5%; operating margin 43.8% vs 17.6%; ttm roe 26.8% vs 10.3%.
Is IDCC's lead over KKR getting stronger or weaker?
IDCC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 21 to 28 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the IDCC vs KKR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: KKR closes the Quality gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to IDCC's edge; KKR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; IDCC'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 IDCC and KKR?
IDCC: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. KKR: 1 bullish / 4 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 IDCC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On KKR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare IDCC and KKR 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.