JPM vs NOK Stock Comparison
JPM currently leads NOK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 49. The clearest difference is momentum, while NOK has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between JPM and NOK?
JPM leads the current stock comparison as JPMorgan Chase & Co., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JPMorgan Chase & Co. vs Nokia Oyj
JPM leads
JPM leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from NOK. Wall Street currently favors NOK on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support JPM, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Nokia Oyj
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JPM over NOK, 52 versus 49 as of Oct 22, 2026. JPM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while NOK holds the stronger value profile. JPM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors NOK. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JPM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. JPM lead: Reversed — NOK led by 13 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 3.
Compare JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Nokia Oyj 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 NOK 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.
- Momentum58 vs 30JPM +28
- Risk Resilience68 vs 46JPM +22
- Value44 vs 63NOK +19
- Quality46 vs 52NOK +6
3 of 6 evidence groups favor JPM. JPM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; NOK keeps a meaningful value 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 +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
JPM'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 NOK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
NOK (Nokia Oyj): the counter-case, on value, quality, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 50.4% against 14.8%.
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
JPMJPM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
JPMJPM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
NOKNOK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 points.
Momentum
JPMJPM on the Momentum factor, by 28 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 22 points.
Analyst upside
NOKNOK on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors JPM, analyst targets favor NOK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | JPM | NOK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.3% | +89.2% | NOK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.2% | +28.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 2 | 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 JPM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 52 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | JPMon balance | revenue growth -7.6% vs 7.1%; EPS growth -27.6% vs -98.1%; TTM ROE 17.9% vs 4.5%; gross margin 63.2% vs 44.6%; operating margin 28.2% vs 8.3% — JPM takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | NOK | Value 44 vs 63 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day -3.4% vs -9.5%; vs 200-day 4% vs -11% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 68 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | NOK | Target upside 11.3% vs 89.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JPM and NOK 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (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 JPM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20JPM lead: Reversed — NOK led by 13 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 3.
- Today
- JPM +3
- 52 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- NOK +3
- 47 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- NOK +13
- 43 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- NOK +5
- 53 vs 58
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 3 when JPM moved ahead of NOK.
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
Only JPM
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only NOK
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.20%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
NOK is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.55%, 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.
- 1NOK closes the Momentum gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to JPM's edge.
- 2NOK's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3JPM'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
JPM leads on balance| Metric | JPM | NOK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7.6% | 7.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -27.6% | -98.1% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 44.6% |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | 8.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.9% | 4.5% |
| Debt to equity | 3.32 | 0.16 |
Performance
JPM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | JPM | NOK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.2% | -8.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.4% | -16.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.7% | -12.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.1% | -11.7% |
| Year to date | 4% | 39.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 12.3% | 59.9% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | JPM | NOK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 57.4 | 37.2 |
| ADX (14) | 20.5 | 17.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.4% | -9.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4% | -11% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 14.8% | 50.4% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | JPM | NOK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.75 | 2.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.47 | 0.96 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.66 | 1.61 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -50.1% |
| Current drawdown | -8.2% | -46.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.2% | 64.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -5.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JPM or NOK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, JPM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 52 against NOK's 49. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. NOK 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 NOK the better buy right now?
JPM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 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 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor JPM over NOK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JPM leads Momentum by 28 points; JPM leads Risk Resilience by 22 points; NOK leads Value by 19 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JPM or NOK?
Analyst price targets imply +11.3% upside for JPM and +89.2% for NOK, so the Street currently favors NOK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors JPM. 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 NOK?
NOK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. NOK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 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 NOK?
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 NOK?
JPM on the Momentum factor, by 28 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 NOK?
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 NOK?
JPM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 63.2% vs 44.6%; operating margin 28.2% vs 8.3%; ttm roe 17.9% vs 4.5%.
Is JPM's lead over NOK getting stronger or weaker?
JPM lead: Reversed — NOK led by 13 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JPM now leads by 3. 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 2026-09-03, when JPM moved ahead of NOK.
What would change the JPM vs NOK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NOK closes the Momentum gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to JPM's edge; NOK's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; JPM'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 NOK?
JPM: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. NOK: 1 bullish / 2 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 NOK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JPM and NOK 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.