JPM vs MNDY Stock Comparison
MNDY currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 56 vs 49. The clearest difference is value, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between JPM and MNDY?
MNDY leads the current stock comparison as monday.com Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JPMorgan Chase & Co. vs monday.com Ltd.
MNDY leads
MNDY leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 19 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support MNDY, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
monday.com Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MNDY over JPM, 56 versus 49 as of Nov 7, 2026. MNDY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. MNDY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MNDY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. MNDY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare JPMorgan Chase & Co. and monday.com Ltd. 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 MNDY 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.
- Value43 vs 65MNDY +22
- Quality46 vs 67MNDY +21
- Risk Resilience61 vs 46JPM +15
- Momentum51 vs 39JPM +12
4 of 6 evidence groups favor MNDY. MNDY’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-11-06, compared against the prior scored session 2026-11-05.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -24
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
MNDY's lead narrowed by 6 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JPM and MNDY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MNDY (monday.com Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, momentum, fundamentals.
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
MNDYMNDY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
JPMJPM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MNDYMNDY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 points.
Momentum
JPMJPM on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
MNDYMNDY 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 | MNDY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.5% | +23.2% | MNDY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.2% | +73.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 12 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MNDY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MNDY | 49 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | revenue growth -7.6% vs 3.8%; EPS growth -27.6% vs -86.3%; TTM ROE 17.9% vs 12.5%; gross margin 63.2% vs 88.7%; operating margin 28.2% vs 2.9% — JPM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | MNDY | Value 43 vs 65 |
| Technicals | MNDY | Price vs 50-day -2.1% vs -3.1%; vs 200-day 3.3% vs 6.5% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 61 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | MNDY | Target upside 11.5% vs 23.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JPM and MNDY 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.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 MNDY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 8 – Nov 6MNDY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MNDY +7
- 49 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- MNDY +13
- 51 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- MNDY +19
- 47 vs 66
- 90 sessions ago
- MNDY +10
- 52 vs 62
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jul 27 when MNDY 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.
3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only JPM
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only MNDY
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.41%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
MNDY 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 -0.84%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -6.3%, 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 Value gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to MNDY's edge.
- 2JPM's EMA Ribbon Compression turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3MNDY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 12 points over 30 sessions, and a further 7-point move would eliminate MNDY'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
JPM leads on balance| Metric | JPM | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7.6% | 3.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -27.6% | -86.3% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 88.7% |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | 2.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.9% | 12.5% |
| Debt to equity | 3.32 | 0.38 |
Performance
JPM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | JPM | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.8% | -8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.5% | -1.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7% | -0.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 10.7% | 22% |
| Year to date | 3.8% | -40.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 7.3% | -54.3% |
Technicals
MNDY has the stronger structure| Metric | JPM | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 50.7 | 43.4 |
| ADX (14) | 14.7 | 14.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.1% | -3.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 3.3% | 6.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.8% | 66.4% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | JPM | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.8 | 0.52 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.23 | -0.82 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.32 | -1.25 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -69% |
| Current drawdown | -8.4% | -53.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.9% | 66.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -6.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JPM or MNDY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MNDY is the stronger of the two as of Nov 7, 2026, scoring 56 against JPM's 49. The edge comes from value and quality. 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 MNDY the better buy right now?
MNDY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Nov 7, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MNDY over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MNDY leads Value by 22 points; MNDY leads Quality by 21 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JPM or MNDY?
Analyst price targets imply +11.5% upside for JPM and +23.2% for MNDY, so the Street currently favors MNDY. 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 MNDY?
MNDY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MNDY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 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 MNDY?
JPM 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 MNDY?
JPM on the Momentum factor, by 12 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 MNDY?
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 MNDY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 63.2% vs 88.7%; operating margin 28.2% vs 2.9%; ttm roe 17.9% vs 12.5%. JPM leads on two measures and MNDY 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.
Is MNDY's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
MNDY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 7 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-08 and 2026-11-06. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-27, when MNDY moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the JPM vs MNDY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Value gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to MNDY's edge; JPM's EMA Ribbon Compression turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; MNDY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 12 points over 30 sessions, and a further 7-point move would eliminate MNDY's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about JPM and MNDY?
JPM: 3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. MNDY: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 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 MNDY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JPM and MNDY 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.