IRM vs JPM Stock Comparison
IRM currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 54 vs 53. The clearest difference is quality, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between IRM and JPM?
IRM leads the current stock comparison as Iron Mountain Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Iron Mountain Incorporated vs JPMorgan Chase & Co.
IRM leads
IRM leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 4 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support IRM, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Iron Mountain Incorporated
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors IRM over JPM, 54 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. IRM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. IRM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IRM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. IRM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Iron Mountain Incorporated and JPMorgan Chase & Co. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare IRM and JPM 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.
- Risk Resilience40 vs 69JPM +29
- Quality54 vs 46IRM +8
- Momentum68 vs 61IRM +7
- Value49 vs 44IRM +5
2 of 6 evidence groups favor IRM. IRM’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
IRM's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — IRM and JPM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
IRM (Iron Mountain Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
IRMIRM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
IRMIRM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
IRMIRM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points.
Momentum
IRMIRM on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 29 points.
Analyst upside
IRMIRM 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 | IRM | JPM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +22.5% | +10.7% | IRM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +16.1% | +32.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | IRM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 5.41% | 9.04% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.474 | $3.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $3.219 | $5.550 |
| Years increased | 3 | 5 |
| No cut in window | No (2) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #120 |
JPM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 9.04% a year against IRM's 5.41%. JPM never reduced its regular dividend in the window; IRM did in 2 years. They are ranked in different cohorts — REITs and US dividend-paying corporations — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IRM. 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 | 54 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | revenue growth 4.8% vs -7.6%; EPS growth -29.2% vs -27.6%; TTM ROE -38.4% vs 17.9%; gross margin 54.2% vs 63.2%; operating margin 18.8% vs 28.2% — JPM takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | IRM | Value 49 vs 44 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 1.5% vs -2%; vs 200-day 0.6% vs 5.2% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 40 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | IRM | Target upside 22.5% vs 10.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of IRM and JPM 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 IRM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30IRM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- IRM +1
- 54 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- JPM +4
- 46 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- IRM +4
- 48 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- JPM +8
- 43 vs 51
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when JPM moved ahead of IRM.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only IRM
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.11%)
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.57%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
IRM 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.55%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.9%, 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.
- 1JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to IRM's edge.
- 2JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3IRM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate IRM's advantage entirely.
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
JPM leads on balance| Metric | IRM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4.8% | -7.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -29.2% | -27.6% |
| Gross margin | 54.2% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 18.8% | 28.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -38.4% | 17.9% |
| Debt to equity | -15.31 | 3.32 |
Performance
JPM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | IRM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.8% | 1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4.3% | 2.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.2% | -3.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 1% | 9.7% |
| Year to date | 39.4% | 5.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 9.9% | 12.9% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | IRM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 55.9 | 60.9 |
| ADX (14) | 20.8 | 15 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.5% | -2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.6% | 5.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.3% | 13% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | IRM | JPM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.17 | 0.73 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.37 | 0.41 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.56 | 0.56 |
| Max drawdown | -24.3% | -15.5% |
| Current drawdown | -13.1% | -7.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 33.1% | 22% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, IRM or JPM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, IRM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 54 against JPM's 53. The edge comes from quality and momentum. JPM 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 IRM or JPM the better buy right now?
IRM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor IRM over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JPM leads Risk Resilience by 29 points; IRM leads Quality by 8 points; IRM leads Momentum by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, IRM or JPM?
Analyst price targets imply +22.5% upside for IRM and +10.7% for JPM, so the Street currently favors IRM. 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, IRM or JPM?
IRM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. IRM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 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, IRM or JPM?
IRM 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, IRM or JPM?
IRM on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, IRM or JPM?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 29 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 IRM more profitable than JPM?
JPM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 54.2% vs 63.2%; operating margin 18.8% vs 28.2%; ttm roe -38.4% vs 17.9%.
Is IRM's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
IRM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-19, when JPM moved ahead of IRM.
What would change the IRM vs JPM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to IRM's edge; JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; IRM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate IRM's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about IRM and JPM?
IRM: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. JPM: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 IRM is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JPM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare IRM and JPM 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.