KMB vs NSSC Stock Comparison
Compare KMB and NSSC across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between KMB and NSSC?
NSSC leads the current stock comparison as Napco Security Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Kimberly-Clark Corporation vs Napco Security Technologies, Inc.
NSSC leads
NSSC leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 8 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support NSSC, and its lead is widening.
Kimberly-Clark Corporation
Napco Security Technologies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NSSC over KMB, 54 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. NSSC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. NSSC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NSSC today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. NSSC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Kimberly-Clark Corporation and Napco Security Technologies, Inc. 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 KMB and NSSC 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.
- Quality57 vs 80NSSC +23
- Risk Resilience45 vs 61NSSC +16
- Momentum21 vs 30NSSC +9
- Value47 vs 44Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor NSSC. NSSC’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
No new signals fired.
NSSC's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — KMB and NSSC both carry a full feed there.
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
NSSCNSSC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NSSCNSSC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
NSSCNSSC on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
NSSCNSSC on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
NSSCNSSC 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 | KMB | NSSC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +12.4% | +43.4% | NSSC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +19.9% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 1 | 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 NSSC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NSSC | 43 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | NSSCon balance | EPS growth -48% vs 51%; TTM ROE 122.6% vs 23.6%; gross margin 36.7% vs 59.2%; operating margin 12.4% vs 22.6% — NSSC takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 47 vs 44 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -10.1% vs -2.6%; vs 200-day -4.6% vs -11.3% |
| Risk Resilience | NSSC | Risk Resilience 45 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | NSSC | Target upside 12.4% vs 43.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of KMB and NSSC and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 11 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 NSSC.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10NSSC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NSSC +11
- 43 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- NSSC +7
- 48 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- NSSC +8
- 53 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- KMB +1
- 58 vs 57
The lead changed hands 13 times in this window, most recently on Aug 25 when KMB moved ahead of NSSC.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.77%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.47%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
KMB 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 -0.34%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.11%, 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.
- 1KMB closes the Quality gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to NSSC's edge.
- 2KMB's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3NSSC starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
NSSC leads on balance| Metric | KMB | NSSC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.6% | 13.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -48% | 51% |
| Gross margin | 36.7% | 59.2% |
| Operating margin | 12.4% | 22.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 122.6% | 23.6% |
| Debt to equity | 3.72 | 0.03 |
Performance
NSSC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | KMB | NSSC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -9.9% | -0.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -9.6% | -8.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.1% | 0.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -1.6% | -16.5% |
| Year to date | -2.4% | -14.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -24.1% | -10.3% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | KMB | NSSC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 24.5 | 36.8 |
| ADX (14) | 17.7 | 36.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -10.1% | -2.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4.6% | -11.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 25.7% | 28% |
Risk
NSSC is the more resilient| Metric | KMB | NSSC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.06 | 1.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.04 | -0.2 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.18 | -0.26 |
| Max drawdown | -28.9% | -26% |
| Current drawdown | -24.8% | -24.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.6% | 40.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -3.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, KMB or NSSC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NSSC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 54 against KMB's 43. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 KMB or NSSC the better buy right now?
NSSC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor NSSC over KMB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NSSC leads Quality by 23 points; NSSC leads Risk Resilience by 16 points; NSSC leads Momentum by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, KMB or NSSC?
Analyst price targets imply +12.4% upside for KMB and +43.4% for NSSC, so the Street currently favors NSSC. 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, KMB or NSSC?
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, KMB or NSSC?
NSSC 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, KMB or NSSC?
NSSC on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, KMB or NSSC?
NSSC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NSSC on Risk Resilience, by 16 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 KMB more profitable than NSSC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 36.7% vs 59.2%; operating margin 12.4% vs 22.6%; ttm roe 122.6% vs 23.6%. KMB leads on one measure and NSSC on two measures, 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 NSSC's lead over KMB getting stronger or weaker?
NSSC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 13 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-25, when KMB moved ahead of NSSC.
What would change the KMB vs NSSC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: KMB closes the Quality gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to NSSC's edge; KMB's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; NSSC starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 KMB and NSSC?
KMB: 3 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. NSSC: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 KMB is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NSSC it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare KMB and NSSC 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.