KPTI vs QQQ Stock Comparison
Compare KPTI and QQQ across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between KPTI and QQQ?
KPTI leads the current stock comparison as Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc. vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
KPTI leads
KPTI leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from QQQ.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support KPTI, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KPTI over QQQ, 65 versus 59 as of Sep 6, 2026. KPTI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while QQQ holds the stronger risk resilience profile. KPTI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor KPTI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. KPTI lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KPTI now leads by 6.
Compare Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc. and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 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 KPTI and QQQ 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 Resilience15%32 vs 75QQQ +43
- Value30%65 vs 30KPTI +35
- Quality30%100 vs 83KPTI +17
- Momentum25%42 vs 54QQQ +12
2 of 4 evidence groups favor KPTI. KPTI’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; QQQ keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
KPTI's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — KPTI and QQQ both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KPTI (Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
QQQ (Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1): the counter-case, on risk resilience, momentum, 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
KPTIKPTI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
KPTIKPTI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 points.
Momentum
QQQQQQ on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
QQQQQQ on Risk Resilience, by 43 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 | KPTI | QQQ | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +469.8% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | +127.5% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor KPTI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | KPTI | 65 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | KPTI | Value 65 vs 30 |
| Technicals | QQQ | Price vs 50-day -66.1% vs 1.1%; vs 200-day -74.9% vs 9.3% |
| Risk Resilience | QQQ | Risk Resilience 32 vs 75 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of KPTI and QQQ 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 6 points.
- Only 2 of 4 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)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 KPTI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5KPTI lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KPTI now leads by 6.
- Today
- KPTI +6
- 65 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- KPTI +5
- 65 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- QQQ +6
- 61 vs 67
- 90 sessions ago
- KPTI +15
- 71 vs 56
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 20 when KPTI moved ahead of QQQ.
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.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (35.25%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.0%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.12%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
KPTI 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 +1.13%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.18%, 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.
- 1QQQ closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to KPTI's edge.
- 2QQQ generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3KPTI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
Split| Metric | KPTI | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -4.7% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -127.5% | — |
| Gross margin | 95.9% | — |
| Operating margin | -56.2% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 77.6% | — |
| Debt to equity | -0.65 | — |
Performance
QQQ leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | KPTI | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.3% | 0.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -15.6% | -0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -80% | 2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -79.6% | 19.9% |
| Year to date | -75.4% | 17% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -74.7% | 26.1% |
Technicals
QQQ has the stronger structure| Metric | KPTI | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 49.2 | 42.1 |
| ADX (14) | 52.1 | 10.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -66.1% | 1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -74.9% | 9.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 96.1% | 12.9% |
Risk
QQQ is the more resilient| Metric | KPTI | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.58 | 1.43 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.37 | 1.04 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.38 | 1.55 |
| Max drawdown | -83.4% | -12.2% |
| Current drawdown | -83.2% | -3.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 113.6% | 19.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -8% | -1.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, KPTI or QQQ?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KPTI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 65 against QQQ's 59. The edge comes from value and quality. QQQ 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 KPTI or QQQ the better buy right now?
KPTI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor KPTI over QQQ?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. QQQ leads Risk Resilience by 43 points; KPTI leads Value by 35 points; KPTI leads Quality by 17 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, KPTI or QQQ?
Analyst price targets imply +469.8% upside for KPTI and not covered for QQQ. 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, KPTI or QQQ?
KPTI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. KPTI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 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, KPTI or QQQ?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, KPTI or QQQ?
QQQ on the Momentum factor, by 12 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, KPTI or QQQ?
QQQ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. QQQ on Risk Resilience, by 43 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is KPTI more profitable than QQQ?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is KPTI's lead over QQQ getting stronger or weaker?
KPTI lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KPTI now leads by 6. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-20, when KPTI moved ahead of QQQ.
What would change the KPTI vs QQQ verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: QQQ closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to KPTI's edge; QQQ generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; KPTI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about KPTI and QQQ?
KPTI: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. QQQ: 3 bullish / 1 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 KPTI is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On QQQ it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.