JPM vs SOLV Stock Comparison
SOLV currently leads JPM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 57 vs 53. The clearest difference is value, while JPM has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between JPM and SOLV?
SOLV leads the current stock comparison as Solventum Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JPMorgan Chase & Co. vs Solventum Corporation
SOLV leads
SOLV leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 14 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support SOLV, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Solventum Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SOLV over JPM, 57 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. SOLV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while JPM holds the stronger momentum profile. SOLV also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SOLV today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. SOLV lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Solventum 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 SOLV 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 36JPM +25
- Value44 vs 67SOLV +23
- Quality46 vs 67SOLV +21
- Risk Resilience69 vs 55JPM +14
3 of 6 evidence groups favor SOLV. SOLV’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; JPM keeps a meaningful momentum 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
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
SOLV's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JPM and SOLV both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SOLV (Solventum Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
JPM (JPMorgan Chase & Co.): the counter-case, on momentum, 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
SOLVSOLV on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SOLVSOLV on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SOLVSOLV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
JPMJPM on the Momentum factor, by 25 points.
Lower downside
JPMJPM on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | JPM | SOLV | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.7% | +11.2% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +32.2% | +77.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 8 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SOLV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SOLV | 53 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | SOLVon balance | revenue growth -7.6% vs 10.1%; EPS growth -27.6% vs 6.6%; TTM ROE 17.9% vs 29%; gross margin 63.2% vs 54.7%; operating margin 28.2% vs 25% — SOLV takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SOLV | Value 44 vs 67 |
| Technicals | JPM | Price vs 50-day -2% vs -7.9%; vs 200-day 5.2% vs 4.5% |
| Risk Resilience | JPM | Risk Resilience 69 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 10.7% vs 11.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of JPM and SOLV 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 SOLV.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28SOLV lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SOLV +4
- 53 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- SOLV +9
- 50 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- SOLV +14
- 44 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- SOLV +16
- 52 vs 68
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SOLV
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- 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.
SOLV 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).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -2.67%, AIQ -1 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 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to SOLV's edge.
- 2JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3SOLV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate SOLV'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
SOLV leads on balance| Metric | JPM | SOLV |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -7.6% | 10.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -27.6% | 6.6% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 54.7% |
| Operating margin | 28.2% | 25% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.9% | 29% |
| Debt to equity | 3.32 | 1.1 |
Performance
JPM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | JPM | SOLV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.2% | -5.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.6% | -7.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.3% | -5.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 9.7% | 23.1% |
| Year to date | 5.3% | 3.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 12.9% | 14.6% |
Technicals
JPM has the stronger structure| Metric | JPM | SOLV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.9 | 36.6 |
| ADX (14) | 15 | 18.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2% | -7.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 5.2% | 4.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13% | 22.5% |
Risk
JPM is the more resilient| Metric | JPM | SOLV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.73 | 0.56 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.41 | 0.5 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.56 | 0.8 |
| Max drawdown | -15.5% | -27.5% |
| Current drawdown | -7.1% | -11.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 22% | 30% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -2.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, JPM or SOLV?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SOLV is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 57 against JPM's 53. The edge comes from value and quality. JPM is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 SOLV the better buy right now?
SOLV 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 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor SOLV over JPM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. JPM leads Momentum by 25 points; SOLV leads Value by 23 points; SOLV leads Quality by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, JPM or SOLV?
Analyst price targets imply +10.7% upside for JPM and +11.2% for SOLV. 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 SOLV?
SOLV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SOLV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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 SOLV?
SOLV 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 SOLV?
JPM on the Momentum factor, by 25 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 SOLV?
JPM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JPM on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 SOLV?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 63.2% vs 54.7%; operating margin 28.2% vs 25%; ttm roe 17.9% vs 29%. JPM leads on two measures and SOLV 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 SOLV's lead over JPM getting stronger or weaker?
SOLV lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 4 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the JPM vs SOLV verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: JPM closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to SOLV's edge; JPM's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; SOLV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate SOLV's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about JPM and SOLV?
JPM: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. SOLV: 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 SOLV it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare JPM and SOLV 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.