JPM vs MCO Stock Comparison
MCO currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 56 vs 51. The clearest difference is quality, while JPM has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between JPM and MCO?
MCO leads the current stock comparison as Moody's Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JPMorgan Chase & Co. vs Moody's Corporation
MCO leads
MCO leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors JPM on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support MCO, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Moody's Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MCO over JPM, 56 versus 51 as of Oct 31, 2026. MCO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while JPM holds the stronger value profile. MCO 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 MCO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. MCO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Moody's Corporation 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 MCO 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 70MCO +24
- Momentum55 vs 79MCO +24
- Value44 vs 24JPM +20
- Risk Resilience68 vs 53JPM +15
3 of 6 evidence groups favor MCO. MCO’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; JPM keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +17
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
The lead changed hands: MCO moved ahead of JPM in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JPM and MCO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MCO (Moody's Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation.
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
MCOMCO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MCOMCO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
JPMJPM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
MCOMCO on the Momentum factor, by 24 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 MCO, analyst targets favor JPM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | JPM | MCO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.7% | +7.3% | JPM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.2% | +24% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 9 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | JPM | MCO |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 9.04% | 10.91% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $3.600 | $2.240 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $5.550 | $3.760 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #120 | #79 |
MCO grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 10.91% a year against JPM's 9.04%. 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 MCO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MCO | 51 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | MCO | revenue growth -7.6% vs -7.4%; EPS growth -27.6% vs -15.5%; TTM ROE 17.9% vs 86.4%; gross margin 63.2% vs 73.1%; operating margin 28.2% vs 44.9% |
| Valuation | JPM | Value 44 vs 24 |
| Technicals | MCO | Price vs 50-day -1.8% vs 3.5%; vs 200-day 4.4% vs 5.8% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 68 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | JPM | Target upside 10.7% vs 7.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JPM and MCO 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 narrow at 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 MCO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30MCO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MCO +5
- 51 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- MCO +8
- 50 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- MCO +3
- 44 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- MCO +8
- 51 vs 59
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Oct 30 when MCO 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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish
Only MCO
- 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.9%, AIQ -2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.04%, 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.
- 1JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to MCO's edge.
- 2JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3MCO'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
MCO leads on balance| Metric | JPM | MCO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7.6% | -7.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -27.6% | -15.5% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 73.1% |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | 44.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.9% | 86.4% |
| Debt to equity | 3.32 | 2.29 |
Performance
MCO leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | JPM | MCO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.6% | 2.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.4% | 11.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.4% | 2.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.9% | 8.4% |
| Year to date | 4.6% | -3.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 10.3% | 4% |
Technicals
MCO has the stronger structure| Metric | JPM | MCO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.1 | 62.4 |
| ADX (14) | 14.3 | 17.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.8% | 3.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.4% | 5.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.3% | 25.5% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | JPM | MCO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.75 | 0.48 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.32 | 0.11 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.44 | 0.15 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -23.6% |
| Current drawdown | -7.7% | -8.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.1% | 27.9% |
| 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 MCO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MCO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 56 against JPM's 51. The edge comes from quality and momentum. JPM is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 MCO the better buy right now?
MCO 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: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MCO over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MCO leads Quality by 24 points; MCO leads Momentum by 24 points; JPM leads Value by 20 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JPM or MCO?
Analyst price targets imply +10.7% upside for JPM and +7.3% for MCO, so the Street currently favors JPM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MCO. 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 MCO?
JPM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. JPM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 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 MCO?
MCO 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 MCO?
MCO 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 MCO?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 MCO?
MCO leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 63.2% vs 73.1%; operating margin 28.2% vs 44.9%; ttm roe 17.9% vs 86.4%.
Is MCO's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
MCO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-30, when MCO moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the JPM vs MCO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to MCO's edge; JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; MCO'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 JPM and MCO?
JPM: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. MCO: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. The most decision-relevant rule on JPM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On MCO it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JPM and MCO 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.