JPM vs BRK.B Stock Comparison
JPMorgan Chase & Co. vs BRK.B
BRK.B leads
BRK.B leads by 6 AIQ points, but the lead has narrowed from 25 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support BRK.B, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BRK.B over JPM, 56 versus 50 as of Sep 2, 2026. BRK.B also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor BRK.B today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. BRK.B lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare JPMorgan Chase & Co. and BRK.B across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
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.
- Momentum25%50 vs 47Even
- Risk Resilience15%70 vs 72Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor BRK.B. Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-01, compared against the prior scored session 2026-08-31.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
BRK.B's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JPM and BRK.B both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BRK.B (BRK.B): the stronger current systematic profile.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on 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
BRK.BBRK.B on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
JPMJPM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
BRK.BBRK.B 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 | JPM | BRK.B | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +0.8% | +13.3% | BRK.B has more room |
| Target dispersion | +34.6% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor BRK.B. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BRK.B | 50 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day 3% vs 1.1%; vs 200-day 12.2% vs 2.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 70 vs 72 |
| Analyst expectations | BRK.B | Target upside 0.8% vs 13.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JPM and BRK.B 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 moderate at 6 points.
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 BRK.B.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 20 – Sep 1BRK.B lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BRK.B +6
- 50 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- BRK.B +3
- 51 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- BRK.B +25
- 56 vs 81
- 90 sessions ago
- BRK.B +16
- 56 vs 72
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 24 when BRK.B 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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (9.60%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.4%)
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.94%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.28%)
BRK.B 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 +0.91%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.99%, AIQ 0 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 generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 2BRK.B's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 3The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 19 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate BRK.B's advantage entirely.
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
Split| Metric | JPM | BRK.B |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 11.9% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 27.6% | — |
| Gross margin | 62.6% | — |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | — |
| Return on equity | 17.8% | — |
| Debt to equity | 3.3 | — |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | JPM | BRK.B |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 41.1 | 35.5 |
| ADX (14) | 11.9 | 16.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3% | 1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 12.2% | 2.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13.7% | 15.7% |
Risk
Split| Metric | JPM | BRK.B |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.79 | 0.04 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.69 | -0.14 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.95 | -0.2 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -9.4% |
| Current drawdown | -2.5% | -4.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.3% | 14.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JPM or BRK.B?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BRK.B is the stronger of the two as of Sep 2, 2026, scoring 56 against JPM's 50. The edge comes from its factor profile. 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 BRK.B the better buy right now?
BRK.B carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 2, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BRK.B over JPM?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. . Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JPM or BRK.B?
Analyst price targets imply +0.8% upside for JPM and +13.3% for BRK.B, so the Street currently favors BRK.B. 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, JPM or BRK.B?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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 BRK.B?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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 BRK.B?
The two are level on Momentum. Momentum carries 25% of 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 BRK.B?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is JPM more profitable than BRK.B?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is BRK.B's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
BRK.B lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-20 and 2026-09-01. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-24, when BRK.B moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the JPM vs BRK.B verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; BRK.B's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 19 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate BRK.B's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about JPM and BRK.B?
JPM: 4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. BRK.B: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 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 JPM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On BRK.B it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JPM and BRK.B with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.