JNJ vs MRK Stock Comparison
JNJ currently leads MRK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 51 vs 45. The clearest difference is quality, while MRK has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between JNJ and MRK?
JNJ leads the current stock comparison as Johnson & Johnson, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Johnson & Johnson vs Merck & Co., Inc.
JNJ leads
JNJ leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support JNJ.
Johnson & Johnson
Merck & Co., Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JNJ over MRK, 51 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. JNJ's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while MRK holds the stronger momentum profile. JNJ also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JNJ today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability.
Compare Johnson & Johnson and Merck & Co., Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare JNJ and MRK 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.
- Quality71 vs 47JNJ +24
- Momentum44 vs 66MRK +22
- Value39 vs 27JNJ +12
- Risk Resilience48 vs 44JNJ +4
4 of 6 evidence groups favor JNJ. JNJ’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; MRK keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
The central trade-off
JNJ (Johnson & Johnson): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
MRK (Merck & Co., Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals.
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
JNJJNJ on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MRKMRK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
JNJJNJ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
MRKMRK on the Momentum factor, by 22 points.
Lower downside
JNJJNJ on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
JNJJNJ 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 | JNJ | MRK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +9.4% | +1.3% | JNJ has more room |
| Target dispersion | +21.3% | +49.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 18 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | JNJ | MRK |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 5.25% | 5.75% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $3.980 | $2.480 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $5.140 | $3.280 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #240 | #221 |
MRK grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 5.75% a year against JNJ's 5.25%. 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JNJ. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | JNJ | 51 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | MRKon balance | revenue growth 0.4% vs 2%; EPS growth -96.2% vs 68.6%; TTM ROE 19.7% vs 6.6%; gross margin 68.8% vs 75.4%; operating margin 25.7% vs 16.7% — MRK takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | JNJ | Value 39 vs 27 |
| Technicals | MRK | Price vs 50-day -2.8% vs 2.8%; vs 200-day 6% vs 18.4% |
| Risk Resilience | JNJ | Risk Resilience 48 vs 44 |
| Analyst expectations | JNJ | Target upside 9.4% vs 1.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JNJ and MRK 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.
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 JNJ.
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.
- 1MRK closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to JNJ's edge.
- 2MRK generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3JNJ starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
MRK leads on balance| Metric | JNJ | MRK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.4% | 2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -96.2% | 68.6% |
| Gross margin | 68.8% | 75.4% |
| Operating margin | 25.7% | 16.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 19.7% | 6.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 1.29 |
Performance
MRK leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | JNJ | MRK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 4.3% | 4.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.7% | -1.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.5% | 16.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 14.7% | 31.8% |
| Year to date | 25.3% | 40.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 35% | 76.7% |
Technicals
MRK has the stronger structure| Metric | JNJ | MRK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 45.3 | 54.6 |
| ADX (14) | 15.1 | 15.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.8% | 2.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6% | 18.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.8% | 29.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JNJ or MRK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, JNJ is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 51 against MRK's 45. The edge comes from quality and value. MRK 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 JNJ or MRK the better buy right now?
JNJ carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 JNJ over MRK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JNJ leads Quality by 24 points; MRK leads Momentum by 22 points; JNJ leads Value by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JNJ or MRK?
Analyst price targets imply +9.4% upside for JNJ and +1.3% for MRK, so the Street currently favors JNJ. 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, JNJ or MRK?
JNJ is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. JNJ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 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, JNJ or MRK?
MRK 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, JNJ or MRK?
MRK on the Momentum factor, by 22 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, JNJ or MRK?
JNJ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JNJ on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 JNJ more profitable than MRK?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 68.8% vs 75.4%; operating margin 25.7% vs 16.7%; ttm roe 19.7% vs 6.6%. JNJ leads on two measures and MRK on one measure, 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.
What would change the JNJ vs MRK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MRK closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to JNJ's edge; MRK generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; JNJ starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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.
Compare JNJ and MRK 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.