JJSF vs ONB Stock Comparison
ONB currently leads JJSF in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 58 vs 52. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between JJSF and ONB?
ONB leads the current stock comparison as Old National Bancorp, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
J&J Snack Foods Corp. vs Old National Bancorp
ONB leads
ONB leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 10 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors JJSF on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ONB, its lead is narrowing, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
J&J Snack Foods Corp.
Old National Bancorp
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ONB over JJSF, 58 versus 52 as of Oct 21, 2026. ONB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value. ONB also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors JJSF. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ONB today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. ONB lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare J&J Snack Foods Corp. and Old National Bancorp 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 JJSF and ONB 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.
- Quality46 vs 56ONB +10
- Value47 vs 57ONB +10
- Risk Resilience64 vs 61Even
- Momentum60 vs 58Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ONB. ONB’s edge is concentrated in quality and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +10
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +10
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
ONB's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JJSF and ONB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ONB (Old National Bancorp): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
JJSF (J&J Snack Foods Corp.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations.
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
ONBONB on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
JJSFJJSF on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ONBONB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
ONBONB carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
JJSFJJSF on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ONB, analyst targets favor JJSF. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | JJSF | ONB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +23.5% | +20.7% | JJSF has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +16.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 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 | JJSF | ONB |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 6.56% | 0.00% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.300 | $0.560 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $3.160 | $0.560 |
| Years increased | 5 | 0 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #200 | #349 |
JJSF grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 6.56% a year against ONB's 0.00%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ONB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ONB | 52 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | ONBon balance | EPS growth 20.3% vs 11.7%; TTM ROE 5.4% vs 10.5%; gross margin 31.1% vs 66.8%; operating margin 4.6% vs 28.7% — ONB takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ONB | Value 47 vs 57 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -1.5% vs -3.5%; vs 200-day 0% vs 3.3% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 64 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | JJSF | Target upside 23.5% vs 20.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JJSF and ONB 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 moderate at 6 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 ONB.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20ONB lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ONB +6
- 52 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- ONB +4
- 50 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- ONB +10
- 44 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- ONB +4
- 55 vs 59
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 26 when ONB moved ahead of JJSF.
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.
JJSF and ONB carry the same 3 signals, so the signals do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
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 -0.09%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -2.96%, 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.
- 1JJSF closes the Quality gap — currently 10 points behind, the largest single contributor to ONB's edge.
- 2JJSF's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3ONB's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate ONB'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
ONB leads on balance| Metric | JJSF | ONB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 23.5% | 0.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 20.3% | 11.7% |
| Gross margin | 31.1% | 66.8% |
| Operating margin | 4.6% | 28.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 5.4% | 10.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.22 | 0.98 |
Performance
ONB leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | JJSF | ONB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.3% | 2.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.9% | 1.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.8% | -4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 0.5% | 6.6% |
| Year to date | -9.5% | 13.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.8% | 29.3% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | JJSF | ONB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 69.9 | 60.8 |
| ADX (14) | 12.9 | 25.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.5% | -3.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0% | 3.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.5% | 19.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | JJSF | ONB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.3 | 0.69 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.31 | 0.99 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.38 | 1.45 |
| Max drawdown | -29% | -18.2% |
| Current drawdown | -16.9% | -7.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.4% | 23.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JJSF or ONB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ONB is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 58 against JJSF's 52. The edge comes from quality and value. 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 JJSF or ONB the better buy right now?
ONB carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 ONB over JJSF?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ONB leads Quality by 10 points; ONB leads Value by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JJSF or ONB?
Analyst price targets imply +23.5% upside for JJSF and +20.7% for ONB, so the Street currently favors JJSF. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ONB. 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, JJSF or ONB?
ONB is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ONB 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, JJSF or ONB?
JJSF 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, JJSF or ONB?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, JJSF or ONB?
ONB is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ONB carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is JJSF more profitable than ONB?
ONB leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 31.1% vs 66.8%; operating margin 4.6% vs 28.7%; ttm roe 5.4% vs 10.5%.
Is ONB's lead over JJSF getting stronger or weaker?
ONB lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-26, when ONB moved ahead of JJSF.
What would change the JJSF vs ONB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JJSF closes the Quality gap — currently 10 points behind, the largest single contributor to ONB's edge; JJSF's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; ONB's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate ONB's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about JJSF and ONB?
JJSF: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. ONB: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on JJSF is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ONB it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JJSF and ONB 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.