JLL vs NDAQ Stock Comparison
JLL currently leads NDAQ in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 62 vs 53. The clearest difference is value, while NDAQ has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between JLL and NDAQ?
JLL leads the current stock comparison as Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated vs Nasdaq, Inc.
JLL leads
JLL leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support JLL, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated
Nasdaq, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JLL over NDAQ, 62 versus 53 as of Oct 22, 2026. JLL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while NDAQ holds the stronger momentum profile. JLL also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JLL today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. JLL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated and Nasdaq, 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 JLL and NDAQ 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.
- Value68 vs 25JLL +43
- Momentum51 vs 72NDAQ +21
- Quality69 vs 61JLL +8
- Risk Resilience56 vs 61NDAQ +5
3 of 6 evidence groups favor JLL. JLL’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; NDAQ keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
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 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +18
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
JLL's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JLL and NDAQ both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
JLL (Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
NDAQ (Nasdaq, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
JLLJLL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
JLLJLL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
JLLJLL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 43 points.
Momentum
NDAQNDAQ on the Momentum factor, by 21 points.
Lower downside
NDAQNDAQ on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
JLLJLL on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | JLL | NDAQ | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +33.6% | +16% | JLL has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.8% | +17.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 6 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JLL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | JLL | 62 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | NDAQon balance | revenue growth 8.5% vs 18.5%; EPS growth 37.5% vs -2.2%; TTM ROE 13.6% vs 16.3%; gross margin 89.6% vs 59.4%; operating margin 4.8% vs 31.6% — NDAQ takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | JLL | Value 68 vs 25 |
| Technicals | NDAQ | Price vs 50-day -10% vs 1.6%; vs 200-day -5% vs 4.8% |
| Risk Resilience | NDAQ | Risk Resilience 56 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | JLL | Target upside 33.6% vs 16% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JLL and NDAQ 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 9 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 JLL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20JLL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- JLL +9
- 62 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- JLL +12
- 59 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- JLL +8
- 53 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- JLL +14
- 66 vs 52
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish
No signal that the other name lacks.
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
Only NDAQ
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.95%, AIQ +2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.39%, AIQ +4 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.
- 1NDAQ closes the Value gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to JLL's edge.
- 2NDAQ's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3JLL'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
NDAQ leads on balance| Metric | JLL | NDAQ |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.5% | 18.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 37.5% | -2.2% |
| Gross margin | 89.6% | 59.4% |
| Operating margin | 4.8% | 31.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.6% | 16.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.34 | 0.77 |
Performance
NDAQ leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | JLL | NDAQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3.6% | 1.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.9% | 0.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.6% | 4.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -10.6% | 8.2% |
| Year to date | -8.2% | -2.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 3.6% | 7.1% |
Technicals
NDAQ has the stronger structure| Metric | JLL | NDAQ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52.8 | 60.7 |
| ADX (14) | 34.8 | 14.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -10% | 1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -5% | 4.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.6% | 17.8% |
Risk
NDAQ is the more resilient| Metric | JLL | NDAQ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.95 | 0.64 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.15 | 0.24 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.19 | 0.31 |
| Max drawdown | -24.8% | -23.9% |
| Current drawdown | -21.3% | -6.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 35.4% | 27.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.1% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JLL or NDAQ?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, JLL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 62 against NDAQ's 53. The edge comes from value and quality. NDAQ is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 JLL or NDAQ the better buy right now?
JLL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 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 JLL over NDAQ?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JLL leads Value by 43 points; NDAQ leads Momentum by 21 points; JLL leads Quality by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JLL or NDAQ?
Analyst price targets imply +33.6% upside for JLL and +16% for NDAQ, so the Street currently favors JLL. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, JLL or NDAQ?
JLL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. JLL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 43 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, JLL or NDAQ?
JLL 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, JLL or NDAQ?
NDAQ on the Momentum factor, by 21 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, JLL or NDAQ?
NDAQ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NDAQ on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 JLL more profitable than NDAQ?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 89.6% vs 59.4%; operating margin 4.8% vs 31.6%; ttm roe 13.6% vs 16.3%. JLL leads on one measure and NDAQ on two measures, 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 JLL's lead over NDAQ getting stronger or weaker?
JLL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the JLL vs NDAQ verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NDAQ closes the Value gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to JLL's edge; NDAQ's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; JLL'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 JLL and NDAQ?
JLL: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. NDAQ: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on JLL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NDAQ it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JLL and NDAQ 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.