JKS vs NEE Stock Comparison
NEE currently leads JKS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 34. The clearest difference is quality, while JKS has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between JKS and NEE?
NEE leads the current stock comparison as NextEra Energy, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd. vs NextEra Energy, Inc.
NEE leads
NEE leads by 18 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 10 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors JKS on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support NEE, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd.
NextEra Energy, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NEE over JKS, 52 versus 34 as of Oct 31, 2026. NEE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while JKS holds the stronger value profile. NEE also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors JKS. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NEE today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. NEE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 18 points over 30 sessions.
Compare JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd. and NextEra Energy, Inc. 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 JKS and NEE 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.
- Quality2 vs 51NEE +49
- Momentum35 vs 70NEE +35
- Value65 vs 38JKS +27
- Risk Resilience36 vs 51NEE +15
4 of 6 evidence groups favor NEE. NEE’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; JKS 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 +2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.4%)
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
New signals
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
NEE's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JKS and NEE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NEE (NextEra Energy, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
JKS (JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 36.7% against 22.7%.
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
NEENEE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NEENEE on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
JKSJKS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 points.
Momentum
NEENEE on the Momentum factor, by 35 points.
Lower downside
NEENEE on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
JKSJKS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors NEE, analyst targets favor JKS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | JKS | NEE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +142.2% | +17.2% | JKS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +103.4% | +62.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 11 | 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 NEE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NEE | 34 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | NEE | EPS growth -48.8% vs 51.7%; TTM ROE -21.5% vs 20.4%; gross margin 4.8% vs 62.4%; operating margin -7% vs 29.7% |
| Valuation | JKS | Value 65 vs 38 |
| Technicals | NEE | Price vs 50-day -19.1% vs 4.2%; vs 200-day -57.1% vs -7.2% |
| Risk Resilience | NEE | Risk Resilience 36 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | JKS | Target upside 142.2% vs 17.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JKS and NEE 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 18 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 NEE.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28NEE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 18 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NEE +18
- 34 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- NEE +20
- 32 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- NEE +10
- 31 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- NEE +22
- 31 vs 53
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.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only JKS
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.56%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.4%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Death Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
NEE 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 +4.86%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.91%, 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.
- 1JKS closes the Quality gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to NEE's edge.
- 2JKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3NEE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
NEE leads on balance| Metric | JKS | NEE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.6% | 7.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -48.8% | 51.7% |
| Gross margin | 4.8% | 62.4% |
| Operating margin | -7% | 29.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -21.5% | 20.4% |
| Debt to equity | 3.4 | 1.85 |
Performance
NEE leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | JKS | NEE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.5% | 3.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.2% | 7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -44.4% | -7.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -61.7% | -14% |
| Year to date | -68% | 0.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -61.7% | -4% |
Technicals
NEE has the stronger structure| Metric | JKS | NEE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 41 | 65.8 |
| ADX (14) | 49.4 | 27.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -19.1% | 4.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -57.1% | -7.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 36.7% | 22.7% |
Risk
NEE is the more resilient| Metric | JKS | NEE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.76 | 0.11 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.42 | -0.23 |
| Sortino ratio | -2.3 | -0.34 |
| Max drawdown | -73.7% | -22.9% |
| Current drawdown | -73% | -17.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 60.9% | 21% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -2.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JKS or NEE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NEE is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 52 against JKS's 34. The edge comes from quality and momentum. JKS 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 JKS or NEE the better buy right now?
NEE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 NEE over JKS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NEE leads Quality by 49 points; NEE leads Momentum by 35 points; JKS leads Value by 27 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JKS or NEE?
Analyst price targets imply +142.2% upside for JKS and +17.2% for NEE, so the Street currently favors JKS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors NEE. 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, JKS or NEE?
JKS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. JKS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 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, JKS or NEE?
NEE 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, JKS or NEE?
NEE on the Momentum factor, by 35 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, JKS or NEE?
NEE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NEE on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 JKS more profitable than NEE?
NEE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 4.8% vs 62.4%; operating margin -7% vs 29.7%; ttm roe -21.5% vs 20.4%.
Is NEE's lead over JKS getting stronger or weaker?
NEE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 18 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the JKS vs NEE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JKS closes the Quality gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to NEE's edge; JKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; NEE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 JKS and NEE?
JKS: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. NEE: 1 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 JKS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On NEE it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare JKS and NEE 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.