KEYS vs MNDY Stock Comparison
Compare KEYS and MNDY across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between KEYS and MNDY?
KEYS leads the current stock comparison as Keysight Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Keysight Technologies, Inc. vs monday.com Ltd.
KEYS leads
KEYS leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from MNDY. Wall Street currently favors MNDY on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support KEYS, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Keysight Technologies, Inc.
monday.com Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KEYS over MNDY, 61 versus 54 as of Sep 11, 2026. KEYS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while MNDY holds the stronger value profile. KEYS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors MNDY. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KEYS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. KEYS lead: Reversed — MNDY led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KEYS now leads by 7.
Compare Keysight Technologies, Inc. and monday.com Ltd. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare KEYS 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.
- Momentum71 vs 30KEYS +41
- Value41 vs 65MNDY +24
- Risk Resilience60 vs 46KEYS +14
- Quality73 vs 67KEYS +6
4 of 6 evidence groups favor KEYS. KEYS’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; MNDY keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No new signals fired.
KEYS's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — KEYS and MNDY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KEYS (Keysight Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
MNDY (monday.com Ltd.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 78.4% against 36.3%.
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
KEYSKEYS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
KEYSKEYS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MNDYMNDY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 24 points.
Momentum
KEYSKEYS on the Momentum factor, by 41 points.
Lower downside
KEYSKEYS on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
MNDYMNDY on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors KEYS, analyst targets favor MNDY. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | KEYS | MNDY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +17.9% | +22.5% | MNDY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.8% | +75.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 12 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KEYS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | KEYS | 61 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | KEYSon balance | revenue growth 7.5% vs 3.8%; EPS growth 13.4% vs -86.3%; TTM ROE 20.1% vs 12.5%; gross margin 64.7% vs 88.7%; operating margin 20.3% vs 2.9% — KEYS takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | MNDY | Value 41 vs 65 |
| Technicals | KEYS | Price vs 50-day 4% vs 0.1%; vs 200-day 12% vs -9.4% |
| Risk Resilience | KEYS | Risk Resilience 60 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | MNDY | Target upside 17.9% vs 22.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of KEYS 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 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 KEYS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10KEYS lead: Reversed — MNDY led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KEYS now leads by 7.
- Today
- KEYS +7
- 61 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- MNDY +8
- 54 vs 62
- 30 sessions ago
- MNDY +9
- 52 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- MNDY +20
- 44 vs 64
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Sep 8 when KEYS moved ahead of MNDY.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.92%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.30%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.51%)
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 +3.99%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.96%, 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.
- 1MNDY closes the Momentum gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to KEYS's edge.
- 2MNDY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3KEYS'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
KEYS leads on balance| Metric | KEYS | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 7.5% | 3.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 13.4% | -86.3% |
| Gross margin | 64.7% | 88.7% |
| Operating margin | 20.3% | 2.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 20.1% | 12.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.42 | 0.38 |
Performance
KEYS leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | KEYS | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.3% | -9.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.1% | -0.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.5% | 4.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 14.6% | 12% |
| Year to date | 60.3% | -42.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 92.4% | -55.3% |
Technicals
KEYS has the stronger structure| Metric | KEYS | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 58.3 | 43.1 |
| ADX (14) | 12.7 | 15.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4% | 0.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 12% | -9.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 36.3% | 78.4% |
Risk
KEYS is the more resilient| Metric | KEYS | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.85 | 0.73 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.62 | -1.01 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.63 | -1.5 |
| Max drawdown | -20.5% | -73.2% |
| Current drawdown | -12.8% | -61.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 43.9% | 64.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.7% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, KEYS or MNDY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KEYS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 61 against MNDY's 54. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. MNDY 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 KEYS or MNDY the better buy right now?
KEYS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor KEYS over MNDY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. KEYS leads Momentum by 41 points; MNDY leads Value by 24 points; KEYS leads Risk Resilience by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, KEYS or MNDY?
Analyst price targets imply +17.9% upside for KEYS and +22.5% for MNDY, so the Street currently favors MNDY. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors KEYS. 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, KEYS or MNDY?
MNDY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MNDY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 24 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, KEYS or MNDY?
KEYS 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, KEYS or MNDY?
KEYS on the Momentum factor, by 41 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, KEYS or MNDY?
KEYS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. KEYS 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 KEYS more profitable than MNDY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 64.7% vs 88.7%; operating margin 20.3% vs 2.9%; ttm roe 20.1% vs 12.5%. KEYS 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 KEYS's lead over MNDY getting stronger or weaker?
KEYS lead: Reversed — MNDY led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KEYS now leads by 7. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-08, when KEYS moved ahead of MNDY.
What would change the KEYS vs MNDY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MNDY closes the Momentum gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to KEYS's edge; MNDY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; KEYS'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 KEYS and MNDY?
KEYS: 3 bullish / 0 bearish. MNDY: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on KEYS is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On MNDY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare KEYS 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.