IOVA vs KPTI Stock Comparison
Compare IOVA and KPTI across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between IOVA and KPTI?
KPTI leads the current stock comparison as Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. vs Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.
KPTI leads
KPTI leads by 23 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, and the lead has widened from 14 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support KPTI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc.
Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KPTI over IOVA, 63 versus 40 as of Sep 11, 2026. KPTI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while IOVA holds the stronger risk resilience profile. KPTI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KPTI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. KPTI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 23 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. and Karyopharm Therapeutics 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 IOVA and KPTI 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.
- Quality30 vs 100KPTI +70
- Value34 vs 65KPTI +31
- Risk Resilience53 vs 32IOVA +21
- Momentum51 vs 35IOVA +16
3 of 6 evidence groups favor KPTI. KPTI’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; IOVA keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 -15
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
KPTI's lead widened by 5 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — IOVA and KPTI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KPTI (Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
IOVA (Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, momentum, fundamentals.
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
KPTIKPTI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
IOVAIOVA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
KPTIKPTI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 points.
Momentum
IOVAIOVA on the Momentum factor, by 16 points.
Lower downside
IOVAIOVA on Risk Resilience, by 21 points.
Analyst upside
KPTIKPTI 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 | IOVA | KPTI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -9% | +533.5% | KPTI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +102.2% | +127.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 4 | 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 KPTI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | KPTI | 40 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | IOVAon balance | revenue growth 39% vs -4.7%; EPS growth 42.1% vs -127.5%; TTM ROE -40.5% vs 77.6%; gross margin 116.3% vs 95.9%; operating margin -92.7% vs -56.2% — IOVA takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | KPTI | Value 34 vs 65 |
| Technicals | IOVA | Price vs 50-day 39.8% vs -66.3%; vs 200-day 102.5% vs -76.1% |
| Risk Resilience | IOVA | Risk Resilience 53 vs 32 |
| Analyst expectations | KPTI | Target upside -9% vs 533.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of IOVA and KPTI 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 wide at 23 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 been steady session to session. (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 KPTI.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10KPTI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 23 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- KPTI +23
- 40 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- KPTI +19
- 46 vs 65
- 30 sessions ago
- KPTI +14
- 47 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- KPTI +27
- 44 vs 71
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (53.00%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (48.07%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
KPTI 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 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +5.65%, AIQ -4 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.62%, 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.
- 1IOVA closes the Quality gap — currently 70 points behind, the largest single contributor to KPTI's edge.
- 2IOVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3KPTI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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
IOVA leads on balance| Metric | IOVA | KPTI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 39% | -4.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 42.1% | -127.5% |
| Gross margin | 116.3% | 95.9% |
| Operating margin | -92.7% | -56.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -40.5% | 77.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.06 | -0.65 |
Performance
IOVA leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | IOVA | KPTI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.6% | -9.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 20.8% | -20.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 115.3% | -80.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 68.2% | -81.2% |
| Year to date | 198.2% | -75.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 242% | -74.1% |
Technicals
IOVA has the stronger structure| Metric | IOVA | KPTI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38 | 40.9 |
| ADX (14) | 50.1 | 51.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 39.8% | -66.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 102.5% | -76.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 85.7% | 89.4% |
Risk
IOVA is the more resilient| Metric | IOVA | KPTI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.31 | 0.61 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.66 | -0.41 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.84 | -0.42 |
| Max drawdown | -39% | -84.8% |
| Current drawdown | -9.4% | -84.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 100.1% | 113.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.9% | -8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, IOVA or KPTI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KPTI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 63 against IOVA's 40. The edge comes from quality and value. IOVA 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 IOVA or KPTI the better buy right now?
KPTI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 KPTI over IOVA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. KPTI leads Quality by 70 points; KPTI leads Value by 31 points; IOVA leads Risk Resilience by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, IOVA or KPTI?
Analyst price targets imply -9% upside for IOVA and +533.5% for KPTI, so the Street currently favors KPTI. 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, IOVA or KPTI?
KPTI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. KPTI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 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, IOVA or KPTI?
IOVA 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, IOVA or KPTI?
IOVA on the Momentum factor, by 16 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, IOVA or KPTI?
IOVA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. IOVA on Risk Resilience, by 21 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 IOVA more profitable than KPTI?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 116.3% vs 95.9%; operating margin -92.7% vs -56.2%; ttm roe -40.5% vs 77.6%. IOVA leads on one measure and KPTI 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 KPTI's lead over IOVA getting stronger or weaker?
KPTI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 23 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 IOVA vs KPTI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: IOVA closes the Quality gap — currently 70 points behind, the largest single contributor to KPTI's edge; IOVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; KPTI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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 IOVA and KPTI?
IOVA: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. KPTI: 2 bullish / 3 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 IOVA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On KPTI it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare IOVA and KPTI 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.