JPM vs LHX Stock Comparison
LHX currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 60 vs 53. The clearest difference is momentum, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between JPM and LHX?
LHX leads the current stock comparison as L3Harris Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JPMorgan Chase & Co. vs L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
LHX leads
LHX leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support LHX, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LHX over JPM, 60 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. LHX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. LHX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LHX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. LHX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare JPMorgan Chase & Co. and L3Harris 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 JPM and LHX 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.
- Momentum61 vs 82LHX +21
- Value44 vs 58LHX +14
- Risk Resilience69 vs 62JPM +7
- Quality46 vs 43Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor LHX. LHX’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
LHX's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JPM and LHX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LHX (L3Harris Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
LHXLHX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
LHXLHX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
LHXLHX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 points.
Momentum
LHXLHX on the Momentum factor, by 21 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
LHXLHX 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 | LHX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.7% | +22.5% | LHX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.2% | +14.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 2 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | JPM | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 9.04% | 7.14% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $3.600 | $3.400 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $5.550 | $4.800 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #120 | #184 |
JPM grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 9.04% a year against LHX's 7.14%. 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LHX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | LHX | 53 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | revenue growth -7.6% vs 2.4%; EPS growth -27.6% vs 15%; TTM ROE 17.9% vs 9.4%; gross margin 63.2% vs 25.5%; operating margin 28.2% vs 10% — JPM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LHX | Value 44 vs 58 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day -2% vs 11.2%; vs 200-day 5.2% vs -14.7% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 69 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | LHX | Target upside 10.7% vs 22.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JPM and LHX 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 7 points.
- 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 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 LHX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28LHX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LHX +7
- 53 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- LHX +10
- 50 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- LHX +3
- 44 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- JPM +7
- 52 vs 45
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Sep 22 when LHX 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 / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.57%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only LHX
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (22.34%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
LHX 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.9%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.29%, 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 closes the Momentum gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to LHX's edge.
- 2JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3LHX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
JPM leads on balance| Metric | JPM | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7.6% | 2.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -27.6% | 15% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 25.5% |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | 10% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.9% | 9.4% |
| Debt to equity | 3.32 | 0.53 |
Performance
JPM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | JPM | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.2% | 5.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.6% | 10.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.3% | -4.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 9.7% | -18.9% |
| Year to date | 5.3% | -11.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 12.9% | -11.1% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | JPM | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.9 | 76.5 |
| ADX (14) | 15 | 38.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2% | 11.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 5.2% | -14.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13% | 23% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | JPM | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.73 | 0.19 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.41 | -0.34 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.56 | -0.51 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -38.3% |
| Current drawdown | -7.1% | -31.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 22% | 28.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JPM or LHX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LHX is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 60 against JPM's 53. The edge comes from momentum 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 LHX the better buy right now?
LHX 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: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LHX over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LHX leads Momentum by 21 points; LHX leads Value by 14 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JPM or LHX?
Analyst price targets imply +10.7% upside for JPM and +22.5% for LHX, so the Street currently favors LHX. 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 LHX?
LHX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LHX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 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 LHX?
LHX 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 LHX?
LHX 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, JPM or LHX?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 LHX?
JPM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 63.2% vs 25.5%; operating margin 28.2% vs 10%; ttm roe 17.9% vs 9.4%.
Is LHX's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
LHX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 7 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-22, when LHX moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the JPM vs LHX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Momentum gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to LHX's edge; JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; LHX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 JPM and LHX?
JPM: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. LHX: 2 bullish / 2 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 LHX it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare JPM and LHX 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.