LAC vs MAG Stock Comparison
Compare LAC and MAG across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between LAC and MAG?
MAG leads the current stock comparison as MAG Silver Corp., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Lithium Americas Corp. vs MAG Silver Corp.
MAG leads
MAG leads by 25 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality. Wall Street currently favors LAC on target upside.
Stable: 3 of 4 evidence groups support MAG.
Lithium Americas Corp.
MAG Silver Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MAG over LAC, 55 versus 30 as of Sep 11, 2026. MAG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality. Analyst target upside, however, currently favors LAC. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor MAG today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. MAG lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 25 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Lithium Americas Corp. and MAG Silver Corp. 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 LAC and MAG 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 Resilience33 vs 100MAG +67
- Quality18 vs 40MAG +22
3 of 4 evidence groups favor MAG. MAG’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality.
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 -19
New signals
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
MAG's lead widened by 7 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LAC and MAG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MAG (MAG Silver Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
LAC (Lithium Americas Corp.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations.
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
MAGMAG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MAGMAG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
MAGMAG on Risk Resilience, by 67 points.
Analyst upside
LACLAC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors MAG, analyst targets favor LAC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | LAC | MAG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +46% | -10.1% | LAC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +11.8% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 1 | 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
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor MAG. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MAG | 30 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | MAG | revenue growth 0% vs 0%; EPS growth 6.1% vs 17.9%; TTM ROE -9% vs 10.3%; gross margin 0% vs 0%; operating margin 0% vs 0% |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | MAG | Risk Resilience 33 vs 100 |
| Analyst expectations | LAC | Target upside 46% vs -10.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LAC and MAG and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 25 points. (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 MAG.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MAG lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 25 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MAG +25
- 30 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- MAG +27
- 28 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- MAG +24
- 32 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- MAG +31
- 25 vs 56
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.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (41.26%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.44%)
No active signals
LAC 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -3.64%, AIQ -7 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.
- 1LAC closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 67 points behind, the largest single contributor to MAG's edge.
- 2LAC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3MAG 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
MAG leads on balance| Metric | LAC | MAG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0% | 0% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 6.1% | 17.9% |
| Gross margin | 0% | 0% |
| Operating margin | 0% | 0% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -9% | 10.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.82 | 0 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | LAC | MAG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.3% | — |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.4% | — |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -27.2% | — |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -35.6% | — |
| Year to date | -30.7% | — |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 1.7% | — |
Technicals
Split| Metric | LAC | MAG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52.2 | — |
| ADX (14) | 12.3 | — |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.2% | — |
| Price vs 200-day | -31.8% | — |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 59.7% | — |
Risk
MAG is the more resilient| Metric | LAC | MAG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.22 | — |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.53 | — |
| Sortino ratio | 1.39 | — |
| Max drawdown | -73% | -3.2% |
| Current drawdown | -70% | -1.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 132% | 27.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.2% | — |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LAC or MAG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MAG is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 55 against LAC's 30. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. 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 LAC or MAG the better buy right now?
MAG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 3 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MAG over LAC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MAG leads Risk Resilience by 67 points; MAG leads Quality by 22 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LAC or MAG?
Analyst price targets imply +46% upside for LAC and -10.1% for MAG, so the Street currently favors LAC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MAG. 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, LAC or MAG?
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, LAC or MAG?
MAG 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, LAC or MAG?
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, LAC or MAG?
MAG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MAG on Risk Resilience, by 67 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 LAC more profitable than MAG?
MAG leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 0% vs 0%; operating margin 0% vs 0%; ttm roe -9% vs 10.3%.
Is MAG's lead over LAC getting stronger or weaker?
MAG lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 25 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the LAC vs MAG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LAC closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 67 points behind, the largest single contributor to MAG's edge; LAC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; MAG 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 LAC and MAG?
LAC: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. MAG: No active signals. 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 LAC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare LAC and MAG 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.