KPTI vs TSM Stock Comparison
KPTI currently leads TSM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 61 vs 58. The clearest difference is value, while TSM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between KPTI and TSM?
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 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
KPTI leads
KPTI leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Value, having only recently taken the lead back from TSM.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support KPTI, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KPTI over TSM, 61 versus 58 as of Oct 22, 2026. KPTI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while TSM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. KPTI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KPTI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. KPTI lead: Reversed — TSM led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KPTI now leads by 3.
Compare Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc. and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited 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 KPTI and TSM 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 Resilience32 vs 67TSM +35
- Value65 vs 45KPTI +20
- Momentum25 vs 22Even
- Quality100 vs 98Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor KPTI. KPTI’s edge is concentrated in value; TSM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-21, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-20.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
KPTI's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — KPTI and TSM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KPTI (Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
TSM (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, 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 most heavily.
Growth
TSMTSM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
KPTIKPTI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
TSMTSM on Risk Resilience, by 35 points.
Analyst upside
KPTIKPTI 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 | KPTI | TSM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +1767.8% | +42.8% | KPTI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +127.5% | +34% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 7 | 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 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 | Even | 61 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | TSMon balance | revenue growth -4.7% vs 17.6%; EPS growth -127.5% vs 8%; TTM ROE 77.6% vs 41.2%; gross margin 95.9% vs 65.8%; operating margin -56.2% vs 57.9% — TSM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | KPTI | Value 65 vs 45 |
| Technicals | TSM | Price vs 50-day -61.2% vs -5.1%; vs 200-day -93.3% vs 8.9% |
| Risk Resilience | TSM | Risk Resilience 32 vs 67 |
| Analyst expectations | KPTI | Target upside 1767.8% vs 42.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of KPTI and TSM 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 3 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 lead has swung materially session to session. (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 KPTI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 22 – Oct 21KPTI lead: Reversed — TSM led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KPTI now leads by 3.
- Today
- KPTI +3
- 61 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- KPTI +5
- 61 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- TSM +12
- 61 vs 73
- 90 sessions ago
- TSM +6
- 61 vs 67
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 14 when KPTI moved ahead of TSM.
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 / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only KPTI
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (347.36%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (30.88%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only TSM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (9.58%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short 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 +28.68%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -4.52%, 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.
- 1TSM closes the Value gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to KPTI's edge.
- 2TSM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3KPTI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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
TSM leads on balance| Metric | KPTI | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -4.7% | 17.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -127.5% | 8% |
| Gross margin | 95.9% | 65.8% |
| Operating margin | -56.2% | 57.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 77.6% | 41.2% |
| Debt to equity | -0.65 | 0.14 |
Performance
TSM leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | KPTI | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 34.7% | 0.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -75.7% | -3.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -94% | 3.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -95.6% | 11.5% |
| Year to date | -94.2% | 42.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -92.8% | 46.4% |
Technicals
TSM has the stronger structure| Metric | KPTI | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 20.9 | 38.7 |
| ADX (14) | 62.5 | 21.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -61.2% | -5.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -93.3% | 8.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 204.1% | 29.3% |
Risk
TSM is the more resilient| Metric | KPTI | TSM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.61 | 2.12 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.33 | 1.05 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.32 | 1.69 |
| Max drawdown | -97% | -21.6% |
| Current drawdown | -96% | -11.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 124.8% | 38.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -10.3% | -3.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, KPTI or TSM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KPTI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 61 against TSM's 58. The edge comes from value. TSM 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 TSM the better buy right now?
KPTI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 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 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor KPTI over TSM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TSM leads Risk Resilience by 35 points; KPTI leads Value by 20 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, KPTI or TSM?
Analyst price targets imply +1767.8% upside for KPTI and +42.8% for TSM, so the Street currently favors KPTI. 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 TSM?
KPTI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. KPTI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 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 TSM?
TSM 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, KPTI or TSM?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, KPTI or TSM?
TSM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSM on Risk Resilience, by 35 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 KPTI more profitable than TSM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 95.9% vs 65.8%; operating margin -56.2% vs 57.9%; ttm roe 77.6% vs 41.2%. KPTI leads on two measures and TSM 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 KPTI's lead over TSM getting stronger or weaker?
KPTI lead: Reversed — TSM led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; KPTI now leads by 3. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-22 and 2026-10-21. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-14, when KPTI moved ahead of TSM.
What would change the KPTI vs TSM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TSM closes the Value gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to KPTI's edge; TSM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; KPTI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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 KPTI and TSM?
KPTI: 2 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. TSM: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 TSM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare KPTI and TSM 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.