JPM vs ADBE Stock Comparison
ADBE currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 75 vs 52. The clearest difference is quality, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between JPM and ADBE?
ADBE leads the current stock comparison as Adobe Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JPMorgan Chase & Co. vs Adobe Inc.
ADBE leads
ADBE leads by 23 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, and the lead has widened from 16 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors JPM on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ADBE, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Adobe Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ADBE over JPM, 75 versus 52 as of Oct 21, 2026. ADBE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. ADBE also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors JPM. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ADBE today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. ADBE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 23 points over 30 sessions.
Compare JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Adobe 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 JPM and ADBE 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 91ADBE +45
- Value44 vs 68ADBE +24
- Momentum58 vs 82ADBE +24
- Risk Resilience68 vs 46JPM +22
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ADBE. ADBE’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +24
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
ADBE's lead widened by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JPM and ADBE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ADBE (Adobe Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
ADBEADBE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ADBEADBE on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ADBEADBE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 24 points.
Momentum
ADBEADBE on the Momentum factor, by 24 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 22 points.
Analyst upside
JPMJPM on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ADBE, analyst targets favor JPM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | JPM | ADBE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.3% | +4.1% | JPM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.2% | +71.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 18 | 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 ADBE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ADBE | 52 vs 75 |
| Fundamentals | ADBE | revenue growth -7.6% vs 3.4%; EPS growth -27.6% vs -7.6%; TTM ROE 17.9% vs 62.4%; gross margin 63.2% vs 89.1%; operating margin 28.2% vs 36.1% |
| Valuation | ADBE | Value 44 vs 68 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -3.4% vs -0.3%; vs 200-day 4% vs 1.3% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 68 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | JPM | Target upside 11.3% vs 4.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JPM and ADBE 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 23 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 ADBE.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20ADBE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 23 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ADBE +23
- 52 vs 75
- 7 sessions ago
- ADBE +23
- 47 vs 70
- 30 sessions ago
- ADBE +16
- 43 vs 59
- 90 sessions ago
- ADBE +15
- 53 vs 68
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jun 26 when ADBE moved ahead of JPM.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only ADBE
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
ADBE 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 -0.02%, AIQ +3 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 6 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.65%, AIQ +6 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.
- 1JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to ADBE's edge.
- 2JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3ADBE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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
ADBE leads on balance| Metric | JPM | ADBE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7.6% | 3.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -27.6% | -7.6% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 89.1% |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | 36.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.9% | 62.4% |
| Debt to equity | 3.32 | 0.61 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | JPM | ADBE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.2% | 8.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.4% | 7.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.7% | 17.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.1% | 3.9% |
| Year to date | 4% | -26.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 12.3% | -22% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | JPM | ADBE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 57.4 | 63.8 |
| ADX (14) | 20.5 | 17.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.4% | -0.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4% | 1.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 14.8% | 33.5% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | JPM | ADBE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.75 | 0.34 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.47 | -0.52 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.66 | -0.78 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -46.3% |
| Current drawdown | -8.2% | -28.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.2% | 41.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -4.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JPM or ADBE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ADBE is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 75 against JPM's 52. The edge comes from quality and value. JPM is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 JPM or ADBE the better buy right now?
ADBE 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 ADBE over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ADBE leads Quality by 45 points; ADBE leads Value by 24 points; ADBE leads Momentum by 24 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JPM or ADBE?
Analyst price targets imply +11.3% upside for JPM and +4.1% for ADBE, so the Street currently favors JPM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ADBE. 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, JPM or ADBE?
ADBE is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ADBE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 24 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, JPM or ADBE?
ADBE 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, JPM or ADBE?
ADBE on the Momentum factor, by 24 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, JPM or ADBE?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 22 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 JPM more profitable than ADBE?
ADBE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 63.2% vs 89.1%; operating margin 28.2% vs 36.1%; ttm roe 17.9% vs 62.4%.
Is ADBE's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
ADBE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 23 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 once in that window, most recently on 2026-06-26, when ADBE moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the JPM vs ADBE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to ADBE's edge; JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; ADBE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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 JPM and ADBE?
JPM: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. ADBE: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 JPM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ADBE it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JPM and ADBE 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.