JD vs TAL Stock Comparison
JD.com, Inc. vs TAL Education Group
TAL leads
TAL leads by 19 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 14 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors JD on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TAL, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JD.com, Inc.
TAL Education Group
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TAL over JD, 64 versus 45 as of Sep 5, 2026. TAL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while JD holds the stronger value profile. TAL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors JD. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TAL today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. TAL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 19 points over 30 sessions.
Compare JD.com, Inc. and TAL Education Group across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare JD and TAL 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%36 vs 78TAL +42
- Momentum25%27 vs 67TAL +40
- Value30%65 vs 55JD +10
- Risk Resilience15%51 vs 47JD +4
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TAL. TAL’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; JD keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
TAL's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JD and TAL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TAL (TAL Education Group): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
JD (JD.com, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation.
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
TALTAL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
TALTAL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
JDJD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
TALTAL on the Momentum factor, by 40 points.
Lower downside
JDJD on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
JDJD on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TAL, analyst targets favor JD. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | JD | TAL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +27% | +9.7% | JD has more room |
| Target dispersion | +44.6% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 1 | 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 TAL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TAL | 45 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | TALon balance | revenue growth 10.1% vs -6.1%; EPS growth 42.5% vs 64.4%; TTM ROE 6.6% vs 24.6%; gross margin 14.7% vs 56% — TAL takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | JD | Value 65 vs 55 |
| Technicals | TAL | Price vs 50-day -3.9% vs 12%; vs 200-day -4.8% vs 9.1% |
| Risk Resilience | JD | Risk Resilience 51 vs 47 |
| Analyst expectations | JD | Target upside 27% vs 9.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JD and TAL 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 19 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 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 TAL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4TAL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 19 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TAL +19
- 45 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- TAL +16
- 43 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- TAL +14
- 49 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- TAL +15
- 44 vs 59
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on May 26 when TAL moved ahead of JD.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.93%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.78%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
TAL 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 +1.87%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +3.42%, 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.
- 1JD closes the Quality gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to TAL's edge.
- 2JD's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3TAL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 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
TAL leads on balance| Metric | JD | TAL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.1% | -6.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 42.5% | 64.4% |
| Gross margin | 14.7% | 56% |
| Operating margin | 0.2% | 12.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 6.6% | 24.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.48 | 0.1 |
Performance
TAL leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | JD | TAL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.6% | 2.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -15.5% | -3.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5% | 23.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 8.9% | 15% |
| Year to date | -3.3% | 9.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.2% | 14.2% |
Technicals
TAL has the stronger structure| Metric | JD | TAL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 33.3 | 56 |
| ADX (14) | 28 | 24.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.9% | 12% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4.8% | 9.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 33.6% | 34.3% |
Risk
JD is the more resilient| Metric | JD | TAL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.8 | 0.76 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.32 | 0.44 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.56 | 0.85 |
| Max drawdown | -30.4% | -30.7% |
| Current drawdown | -23.3% | -7.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.9% | 45.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -3.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JD or TAL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TAL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 64 against JD's 45. The edge comes from quality and momentum. JD 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 JD or TAL the better buy right now?
TAL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 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 TAL over JD?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. TAL leads Quality by 42 points; TAL leads Momentum by 40 points; JD leads Value by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JD or TAL?
Analyst price targets imply +27% upside for JD and +9.7% for TAL, so the Street currently favors JD. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TAL. 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, JD or TAL?
JD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. JD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, JD or TAL?
TAL 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, JD or TAL?
TAL on the Momentum factor, by 40 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, JD or TAL?
JD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JD 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 JD more profitable than TAL?
TAL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 14.7% vs 56%; operating margin 0.2% vs 12.5%; ttm roe 6.6% vs 24.6%.
Is TAL's lead over JD getting stronger or weaker?
TAL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 19 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-05-26, when TAL moved ahead of JD.
What would change the JD vs TAL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JD closes the Quality gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to TAL's edge; JD's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; TAL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; 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 JD and TAL?
JD: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TAL: 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 JD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TAL it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JD and TAL 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.