JPM vs PLNT Stock Comparison
PLNT currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 54 vs 52. The clearest difference is momentum, while JPM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between JPM and PLNT?
PLNT leads the current stock comparison as Planet Fitness, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JPMorgan Chase & Co. vs Planet Fitness, Inc.
PLNT leads
PLNT leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from JPM.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support PLNT, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Planet Fitness, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PLNT over JPM, 54 versus 52 as of Oct 21, 2026. PLNT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while JPM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. PLNT also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PLNT today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. PLNT lead: Reversed — JPM led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PLNT now leads by 2.
Compare JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Planet Fitness, 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 PLNT 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.
- Risk Resilience68 vs 38JPM +30
- Momentum58 vs 76PLNT +18
- Quality46 vs 53PLNT +7
- Value44 vs 44Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor PLNT. PLNT’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; JPM keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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: Risk Resilience +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.
PLNT's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JPM and PLNT both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PLNT (Planet Fitness, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
PLNTPLNT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PLNTPLNT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
PLNTPLNT on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 30 points.
Analyst upside
PLNTPLNT 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 | PLNT | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.3% | +42.7% | PLNT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.2% | +116.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 14 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PLNT. 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 54 |
| Fundamentals | PLNTon balance | revenue growth -7.6% vs 8.3%; EPS growth -27.6% vs 33.8%; TTM ROE 17.9% vs -53.6%; gross margin 63.2% vs 50.3%; operating margin 28.2% vs 30.7% — PLNT takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 44 vs 44 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day -3.4% vs 6.7%; vs 200-day 4% vs -18.1% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 68 vs 38 |
| Analyst expectations | PLNT | Target upside 11.3% vs 42.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JPM and PLNT 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 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 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 PLNT.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20PLNT lead: Reversed — JPM led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PLNT now leads by 2.
- Today
- PLNT +2
- 52 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- PLNT +6
- 47 vs 53
- 30 sessions ago
- JPM +3
- 43 vs 40
- 90 sessions ago
- JPM +11
- 53 vs 42
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 9 when PLNT 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
Only JPM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.65%)
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only PLNT
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (32.14%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.69%)
- 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.
PLNT 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 -0.02%, AIQ +3 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.4%, 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 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to PLNT's edge.
- 2JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3PLNT'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
PLNT leads on balance| Metric | JPM | PLNT |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7.6% | 8.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -27.6% | 33.8% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 50.3% |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | 30.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.9% | -53.6% |
| Debt to equity | 3.32 | -4.82 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | JPM | PLNT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.2% | 11.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.4% | 20.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.7% | -2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.1% | -26.4% |
| Year to date | 4% | -51.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 12.3% | -43.4% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | JPM | PLNT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 57.4 | 76.2 |
| ADX (14) | 20.5 | 24.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.4% | 6.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4% | -18.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 14.8% | 51.2% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | JPM | PLNT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.75 | 0.27 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.47 | -0.95 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.66 | -0.97 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -63.8% |
| Current drawdown | -8.2% | -52.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.2% | 50.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -3.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JPM or PLNT?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PLNT is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 54 against JPM's 52. The edge comes from momentum 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 PLNT the better buy right now?
PLNT carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor PLNT over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JPM leads Risk Resilience by 30 points; PLNT leads Momentum by 18 points; PLNT leads Quality by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JPM or PLNT?
Analyst price targets imply +11.3% upside for JPM and +42.7% for PLNT, so the Street currently favors PLNT. 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 PLNT?
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 PLNT?
PLNT 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 PLNT?
PLNT on the Momentum factor, by 18 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 PLNT?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 30 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 PLNT?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 63.2% vs 50.3%; operating margin 28.2% vs 30.7%; ttm roe 17.9% vs -53.6%. JPM leads on two measures and PLNT 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 PLNT's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
PLNT lead: Reversed — JPM led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PLNT now leads by 2. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-09, when PLNT moved ahead of JPM.
What would change the JPM vs PLNT verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to PLNT's edge; JPM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; PLNT'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 PLNT?
JPM: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. PLNT: 2 bullish / 2 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 PLNT it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare JPM and PLNT 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.