IQ vs MTCH Stock Comparison
Compare IQ and MTCH across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between IQ and MTCH?
MTCH leads the current stock comparison as Match Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
iQIYI, Inc. vs Match Group, Inc.
MTCH leads
MTCH leads by 20 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors IQ on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support MTCH, and its current signal state is conflicted.
iQIYI, Inc.
Match Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MTCH over IQ, 57 versus 37 as of Sep 11, 2026. MTCH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while IQ holds the stronger value profile. MTCH also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors IQ. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MTCH today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. MTCH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 20 points over 30 sessions.
Compare iQIYI, Inc. and Match Group, 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 IQ and MTCH 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.
- Quality21 vs 60MTCH +39
- Momentum33 vs 69MTCH +36
- Risk Resilience22 vs 47MTCH +25
- Value65 vs 50IQ +15
4 of 6 evidence groups favor MTCH. MTCH’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; IQ keeps a meaningful value 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 +6
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
No new signals fired.
MTCH's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — IQ and MTCH both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MTCH (Match Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
IQ (iQIYI, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 75.9% against 28.4%.
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
MTCHMTCH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MTCHMTCH on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
IQIQ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
MTCHMTCH on the Momentum factor, by 36 points.
Lower downside
MTCHMTCH on Risk Resilience, by 25 points.
Analyst upside
IQIQ on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors MTCH, analyst targets favor IQ. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | IQ | MTCH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +47% | -2.8% | IQ has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +34% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 7 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MTCH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MTCH | 37 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | MTCHon balance | revenue growth 0.7% vs -1.3%; EPS growth 1.6% vs 5.8%; TTM ROE -6.4% vs -3%; gross margin 17.9% vs 74.8%; operating margin -1.5% vs 28.2% — MTCH takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | IQ | Value 65 vs 50 |
| Technicals | MTCH | Price vs 50-day -16.5% vs 7.5%; vs 200-day -35.1% vs 20.1% |
| Risk Resilience | MTCH | Risk Resilience 22 vs 47 |
| Analyst expectations | IQ | Target upside 47% vs -2.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of IQ and MTCH 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 20 points. (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)
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 MTCH.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MTCH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 20 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MTCH +20
- 37 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- MTCH +25
- 35 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- MTCH +20
- 36 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- MTCH +22
- 38 vs 60
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.
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (26.50%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.27%)
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.25%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
MTCH 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 +1.68%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.36%, 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.
- 1IQ closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to MTCH's edge.
- 2IQ's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3MTCH's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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
MTCH leads on balance| Metric | IQ | MTCH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.7% | -1.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 1.6% | 5.8% |
| Gross margin | 17.9% | 74.8% |
| Operating margin | -1.5% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -6.4% | -3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.12 | -14.98 |
Performance
MTCH leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | IQ | MTCH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 8.9% | -1.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -29.6% | 14.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -9.1% | 21.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -30.6% | 36.7% |
| Year to date | -51.2% | 29.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -65.6% | 7.9% |
Technicals
MTCH has the stronger structure| Metric | IQ | MTCH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.1 | 59.4 |
| ADX (14) | 45 | 19.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -16.5% | 7.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -35.1% | 20.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 75.9% | 28.4% |
Risk
MTCH is the more resilient| Metric | IQ | MTCH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.31 | 0.9 |
| Sharpe ratio | -2.03 | 0.32 |
| Sortino ratio | -3.4 | 0.47 |
| Max drawdown | -69.2% | -25.1% |
| Current drawdown | -66.4% | -1.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.7% | 32.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.1% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, IQ or MTCH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MTCH is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 57 against IQ's 37. The edge comes from quality and momentum. IQ 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 IQ or MTCH the better buy right now?
MTCH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 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 MTCH over IQ?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MTCH leads Quality by 39 points; MTCH leads Momentum by 36 points; MTCH leads Risk Resilience by 25 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, IQ or MTCH?
Analyst price targets imply +47% upside for IQ and -2.8% for MTCH, so the Street currently favors IQ. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MTCH. 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, IQ or MTCH?
IQ is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. IQ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, IQ or MTCH?
MTCH 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, IQ or MTCH?
MTCH on the Momentum factor, by 36 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, IQ or MTCH?
MTCH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MTCH on Risk Resilience, by 25 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 IQ more profitable than MTCH?
MTCH leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 17.9% vs 74.8%; operating margin -1.5% vs 28.2%; ttm roe -6.4% vs -3%.
Is MTCH's lead over IQ getting stronger or weaker?
MTCH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 20 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 IQ vs MTCH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: IQ closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to MTCH's edge; IQ's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; MTCH's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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 IQ and MTCH?
IQ: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. MTCH: 3 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 IQ is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On MTCH it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare IQ and MTCH 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.