JBS vs KHC Stock Comparison
KHC currently leads JBS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 48 vs 40. The clearest difference is momentum, while JBS has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between JBS and KHC?
KHC leads the current stock comparison as The Kraft Heinz Company, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Jbs N.V. vs The Kraft Heinz Company
KHC leads
KHC leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from JBS. Wall Street currently favors JBS on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support KHC, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Jbs N.V.
The Kraft Heinz Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KHC over JBS, 48 versus 40 as of Oct 31, 2026. KHC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while JBS holds the stronger value profile. KHC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors JBS. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KHC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. KHC lead: Reversed — JBS led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KHC now leads by 8.
Compare Jbs N.V. and The Kraft Heinz Company 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 JBS and KHC 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.
- Momentum26 vs 52KHC +26
- Quality23 vs 37KHC +14
- Value71 vs 60JBS +11
- Risk Resilience34 vs 41KHC +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor KHC. KHC’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; JBS keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -12
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -11
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
KHC's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JBS and KHC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KHC (The Kraft Heinz Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
JBS (Jbs N.V.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 41.3% against 35%.
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
KHCKHC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
KHCKHC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
JBSJBS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
KHCKHC on the Momentum factor, by 26 points.
Lower downside
KHCKHC on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
JBSJBS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors KHC, analyst targets favor JBS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | JBS | KHC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +43.2% | -1% | JBS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +16.8% | +45.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 8 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | JBS | KHC |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 28.54% | 0.00% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.257 | $1.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.901 | $1.600 |
| Years increased | 3 | 0 |
| No cut in window | No (2) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #349 |
JBS grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 28.54% a year against KHC's 0.00%. KHC never reduced its regular dividend in the window; JBS did in 2 years. They are ranked in different cohorts — variable-dividend payers 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KHC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | KHC | 40 vs 48 |
| Fundamentals | KHCon balance | revenue growth -78.6% vs 3.6%; EPS growth -109.3% vs -7.9%; TTM ROE 17.7% vs -8.4%; gross margin 11.9% vs 32.8%; operating margin 3.8% vs -13% — KHC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | JBS | Value 71 vs 60 |
| Technicals | KHC | Price vs 50-day -0.7% vs 1%; vs 200-day -16% vs -0.1% |
| Risk Resilience | KHC | Risk Resilience 34 vs 41 |
| Analyst expectations | JBS | Target upside 43.2% vs -1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JBS and KHC 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 moderate at 8 points.
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 KHC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28KHC lead: Reversed — JBS led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KHC now leads by 8.
- Today
- KHC +8
- 40 vs 48
- 7 sessions ago
- KHC +9
- 46 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- JBS +3
- 45 vs 42
- 90 sessions ago
- JBS +12
- 59 vs 47
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 20 when KHC moved ahead of JBS.
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 / 2 neutral
Only JBS
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (12.29%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.62%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only KHC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.96%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze.
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 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.71%, AIQ -3 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.84%, 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.
- 1JBS closes the Momentum gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to KHC's edge.
- 2JBS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3KHC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
KHC leads on balance| Metric | JBS | KHC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -78.6% | 3.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -109.3% | -7.9% |
| Gross margin | 11.9% | 32.8% |
| Operating margin | 3.8% | -13% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.7% | -8.4% |
| Debt to equity | 2.97 | 0.53 |
Performance
KHC leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | JBS | KHC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.9% | 1.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 5% | 5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -17% | -9.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -24.4% | 6.4% |
| Year to date | -17.8% | -1.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -6.5% | -5.5% |
Technicals
KHC has the stronger structure| Metric | JBS | KHC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 31.4 | 61.5 |
| ADX (14) | 24.4 | 27.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.7% | 1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -16% | -0.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 41.3% | 35% |
Risk
KHC is the more resilient| Metric | JBS | KHC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.24 | -0.13 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.26 | -0.24 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.43 | -0.39 |
| Max drawdown | -41% | -20.9% |
| Current drawdown | -35.6% | -13.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.2% | 27.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JBS or KHC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KHC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 48 against JBS's 40. The edge comes from momentum and quality. JBS 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 JBS or KHC the better buy right now?
KHC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor KHC over JBS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. KHC leads Momentum by 26 points; KHC leads Quality by 14 points; JBS leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JBS or KHC?
Analyst price targets imply +43.2% upside for JBS and -1% for KHC, so the Street currently favors JBS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors KHC. 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, JBS or KHC?
JBS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. JBS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, JBS or KHC?
KHC 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, JBS or KHC?
KHC on the Momentum factor, by 26 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, JBS or KHC?
KHC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. KHC on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 JBS more profitable than KHC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 11.9% vs 32.8%; operating margin 3.8% vs -13%; ttm roe 17.7% vs -8.4%. JBS leads on two measures and KHC 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 KHC's lead over JBS getting stronger or weaker?
KHC lead: Reversed — JBS led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KHC now leads by 8. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-20, when KHC moved ahead of JBS.
What would change the JBS vs KHC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JBS closes the Momentum gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to KHC's edge; JBS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; KHC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 JBS and KHC?
JBS: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral. KHC: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on JBS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On KHC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JBS and KHC 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.