JKS vs ORA Stock Comparison
ORA currently leads JKS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 36 vs 34. The clearest difference is quality, while JKS has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between JKS and ORA?
ORA leads the current stock comparison as Ormat Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd. vs Ormat Technologies, Inc.
ORA leads
ORA leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from JKS. Wall Street currently favors JKS on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ORA, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd.
Ormat Technologies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ORA over JKS, 36 versus 34 as of Oct 31, 2026. ORA's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while JKS holds the stronger value profile. ORA also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors JKS. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ORA today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. ORA lead: Reversed — JKS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ORA now leads by 2.
Compare JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd. and Ormat Technologies, 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 ORA 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.
- Value65 vs 26JKS +39
- Quality2 vs 28ORA +26
- Momentum35 vs 50ORA +15
- Risk Resilience36 vs 48ORA +12
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ORA. ORA’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 +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
ORA's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JKS and ORA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ORA (Ormat Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
JKS (JinkoSolar Holding Co., Ltd.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, 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
ORAORA on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
JKSJKS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
JKSJKS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 39 points.
Momentum
ORAORA on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
ORAORA on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 ORA, analyst targets favor JKS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | JKS | ORA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +142.2% | +45.2% | JKS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +103.4% | +39.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 7 | 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 ORA. 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 | 34 vs 36 |
| Fundamentals | ORA | EPS growth -48.8% vs -38.9%; TTM ROE -21.5% vs 5%; gross margin 4.8% vs 27.9%; operating margin -7% vs 14.9% |
| Valuation | JKS | Value 65 vs 26 |
| Technicals | ORA | Price vs 50-day -19.1% vs -6.3%; vs 200-day -57.1% vs -18% |
| Risk Resilience | ORA | Risk Resilience 36 vs 48 |
| Analyst expectations | JKS | Target upside 142.2% vs 45.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JKS and ORA 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 ORA.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28ORA lead: Reversed — JKS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ORA now leads by 2.
- Today
- ORA +2
- 34 vs 36
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 32 vs 32
- 30 sessions ago
- JKS +1
- 31 vs 30
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 31 vs 31
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Oct 27 when ORA moved ahead of JKS.
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%)
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
ORA 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -2.74%, 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 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to ORA's edge.
- 2JKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3ORA's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
ORA leads on balance| Metric | JKS | ORA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.6% | -35.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -48.8% | -38.9% |
| Gross margin | 4.8% | 27.9% |
| Operating margin | -7% | 14.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -21.5% | 5% |
| Debt to equity | 3.4 | 1.31 |
Performance
ORA leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | JKS | ORA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.5% | 2.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.2% | 0.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -44.4% | -5.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -61.7% | -16.9% |
| Year to date | -68% | -17% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -61.7% | -13.8% |
Technicals
ORA has the stronger structure| Metric | JKS | ORA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 41 | 57.1 |
| ADX (14) | 49.4 | 22 |
| Price vs 50-day | -19.1% | -6.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -57.1% | -18% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 36.7% | 38.2% |
Risk
ORA is the more resilient| Metric | JKS | ORA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.76 | 0.92 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.42 | -0.31 |
| Sortino ratio | -2.3 | -0.49 |
| Max drawdown | -73.7% | -40.3% |
| Current drawdown | -73% | -36.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 60.9% | 37.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -3.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JKS or ORA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ORA is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 36 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 ORA the better buy right now?
ORA carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ORA over JKS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JKS leads Value by 39 points; ORA leads Quality by 26 points; ORA leads Momentum by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JKS or ORA?
Analyst price targets imply +142.2% upside for JKS and +45.2% for ORA, so the Street currently favors JKS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ORA. 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 ORA?
JKS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. JKS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 39 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 ORA?
JKS 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 ORA?
ORA on the Momentum factor, by 15 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 ORA?
ORA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ORA on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 ORA?
ORA leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 4.8% vs 27.9%; operating margin -7% vs 14.9%; ttm roe -21.5% vs 5%.
Is ORA's lead over JKS getting stronger or weaker?
ORA lead: Reversed — JKS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ORA now leads by 2. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-27, when ORA moved ahead of JKS.
What would change the JKS vs ORA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JKS closes the Quality gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to ORA's edge; JKS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; ORA's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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 ORA?
JKS: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. ORA: 1 bullish / 2 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 ORA it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare JKS and ORA 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.