INSP vs ISRG Stock Comparison
Compare INSP and ISRG across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between INSP and ISRG?
INSP leads the current stock comparison as Inspire Medical Systems, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Inspire Medical Systems, Inc. vs Intuitive Surgical, Inc.
INSP leads
INSP leads by 18 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 0 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors ISRG on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support INSP, and its lead is widening.
Inspire Medical Systems, Inc.
Intuitive Surgical, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors INSP over ISRG, 65 versus 47 as of Sep 6, 2026. INSP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while ISRG holds the stronger risk resilience profile. INSP also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ISRG. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INSP today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. INSP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 18 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Inspire Medical Systems, Inc. and Intuitive Surgical, 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 INSP and ISRG 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.
- Momentum25%70 vs 24INSP +46
- Value30%49 vs 26INSP +23
- Risk Resilience15%62 vs 66ISRG +4
- Quality30%77 vs 78Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor INSP. INSP’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; ISRG keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
INSP's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INSP and ISRG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
INSP (Inspire Medical Systems, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
ISRG (Intuitive Surgical, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, 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
INSPINSP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
INSPINSP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
INSPINSP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
INSPINSP on the Momentum factor, by 46 points.
Lower downside
ISRGISRG on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
ISRGISRG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors INSP, analyst targets favor ISRG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | INSP | ISRG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -9.5% | +38.7% | ISRG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +80.6% | +61.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 16 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INSP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | INSP | 65 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | ISRGon balance | revenue growth -2% vs 4.4%; TTM ROE 17.6% vs 17.8%; gross margin 86.1% vs 66.7%; operating margin 6% vs 31.3% — ISRG takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | INSP | Value 49 vs 26 |
| Technicals | INSP | Price vs 50-day 14.7% vs -3.8%; vs 200-day -5.1% vs -20.9% |
| Risk Resilience | ISRG | Risk Resilience 62 vs 66 |
| Analyst expectations | ISRG | Target upside -9.5% vs 38.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INSP and ISRG and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 18 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (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 INSP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5INSP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 18 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- INSP +18
- 65 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- INSP +16
- 63 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 62 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- INSP +10
- 65 vs 55
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Apr 27 when INSP moved ahead of ISRG.
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (20.32%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.11%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (21.73%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
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 +1.51%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.85%, 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.
- 1ISRG closes the Momentum gap — currently 46 points behind, the largest single contributor to INSP's edge.
- 2ISRG's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3INSP starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
ISRG leads on balance| Metric | INSP | ISRG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -2% | 4.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 102.8% | 0.4% |
| Gross margin | 86.1% | 66.7% |
| Operating margin | 6% | 31.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.6% | 17.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.04 | 0 |
Performance
INSP leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | INSP | ISRG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.7% | -1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4.9% | -3.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 53.1% | -13.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 0.1% | -25.2% |
| Year to date | -31.6% | -35.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -26.3% | -16.9% |
Technicals
INSP has the stronger structure| Metric | INSP | ISRG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 68.3 | 33.6 |
| ADX (14) | 35.1 | 11.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 14.7% | -3.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -5.1% | -20.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 35.7% | 31.1% |
Risk
ISRG is the more resilient| Metric | INSP | ISRG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.09 | 0.92 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.16 | -0.51 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.25 | -0.71 |
| Max drawdown | -72.2% | -44% |
| Current drawdown | -56.2% | -38.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 70.6% | 36.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INSP or ISRG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, INSP is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 65 against ISRG's 47. The edge comes from momentum and value. ISRG 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 INSP or ISRG the better buy right now?
INSP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor INSP over ISRG?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. INSP leads Momentum by 46 points; INSP leads Value by 23 points; ISRG leads Risk Resilience by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INSP or ISRG?
Analyst price targets imply -9.5% upside for INSP and +38.7% for ISRG, so the Street currently favors ISRG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors INSP. 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, INSP or ISRG?
INSP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. INSP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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, INSP or ISRG?
INSP 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, INSP or ISRG?
INSP on the Momentum factor, by 46 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, INSP or ISRG?
ISRG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ISRG on Risk Resilience, by 4 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is INSP more profitable than ISRG?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 86.1% vs 66.7%; operating margin 6% vs 31.3%; ttm roe 17.6% vs 17.8%. Each name leads 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 INSP's lead over ISRG getting stronger or weaker?
INSP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 18 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-04-27, when INSP moved ahead of ISRG.
What would change the INSP vs ISRG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ISRG closes the Momentum gap — currently 46 points behind, the largest single contributor to INSP's edge; ISRG's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; INSP starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about INSP and ISRG?
INSP: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. ISRG: 0 bullish / 3 bearish. The most decision-relevant rule on INSP is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On ISRG it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare INSP and ISRG with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.