LDOS vs MNDY Stock Comparison
MNDY currently leads LDOS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 68 vs 57. The clearest difference is momentum, while LDOS has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between LDOS and MNDY?
MNDY leads the current stock comparison as monday.com Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Leidos Holdings, Inc. vs monday.com Ltd.
MNDY leads
MNDY leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors LDOS on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support MNDY, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Leidos Holdings, Inc.
monday.com Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MNDY over LDOS, 68 versus 57 as of Oct 21, 2026. MNDY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while LDOS holds the stronger value profile. MNDY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors LDOS. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MNDY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. MNDY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Leidos Holdings, Inc. and monday.com Ltd. 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 LDOS 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.
- Momentum54 vs 84MNDY +30
- Quality47 vs 67MNDY +20
- Value73 vs 65LDOS +8
- Risk Resilience52 vs 46LDOS +6
2 of 6 evidence groups favor MNDY. MNDY’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; LDOS keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
MNDY's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LDOS and MNDY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MNDY (monday.com Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
LDOS (Leidos Holdings, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
MNDYMNDY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
LDOSLDOS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
LDOSLDOS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
MNDYMNDY on the Momentum factor, by 30 points.
Lower downside
LDOSLDOS on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
LDOSLDOS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors MNDY, analyst targets favor LDOS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | LDOS | MNDY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.8% | +6.9% | LDOS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +41.5% | +74.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 11 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MNDY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MNDY | 57 vs 68 |
| Fundamentals | LDOSon balance | revenue growth 3.6% vs 3.8%; EPS growth 8.1% vs -86.3%; TTM ROE 27.6% vs 12.5%; gross margin 17.4% vs 88.7%; operating margin 11.5% vs 2.9% — LDOS takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LDOS | Value 73 vs 65 |
| Technicals | MNDY | Price vs 50-day -0.6% vs 12.7%; vs 200-day -11% vs 9.8% |
| Risk Resilience | LDOS | Risk Resilience 52 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | LDOS | Target upside 11.8% vs 6.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LDOS 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 11 points.
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 MNDY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20MNDY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MNDY +11
- 57 vs 68
- 7 sessions ago
- MNDY +12
- 54 vs 66
- 30 sessions ago
- MNDY +3
- 51 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- LDOS +2
- 62 vs 60
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 20 when MNDY moved ahead of LDOS.
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, conflicted
Only LDOS
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (10.31%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
4 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only MNDY
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.38%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.16%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
MNDY 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.23%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.7%, 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.
- 1LDOS closes the Momentum gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to MNDY's edge.
- 2LDOS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3MNDY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 2 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
LDOS leads on balance| Metric | LDOS | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.6% | 3.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 8.1% | -86.3% |
| Gross margin | 17.4% | 88.7% |
| Operating margin | 11.5% | 2.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 27.6% | 12.5% |
| Debt to equity | 1.24 | 0.38 |
Performance
MNDY leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | LDOS | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 6.6% | 19.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.5% | 18.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 19% | 35.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.7% | 43.5% |
| Year to date | -29.2% | -31.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -30.8% | -43% |
Technicals
MNDY has the stronger structure| Metric | LDOS | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 59.7 | 72.7 |
| ADX (14) | 18.7 | 13.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.6% | 12.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -11% | 9.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 31.4% | 64.5% |
Risk
LDOS is the more resilient| Metric | LDOS | MNDY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.33 | 0.7 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.98 | -0.62 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.35 | -0.93 |
| Max drawdown | -49.9% | -71.3% |
| Current drawdown | -36% | -50.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 35.3% | 66.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LDOS or MNDY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MNDY is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 68 against LDOS's 57. The edge comes from momentum and quality. LDOS 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 LDOS or MNDY the better buy right now?
MNDY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MNDY over LDOS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MNDY leads Momentum by 30 points; MNDY leads Quality by 20 points; LDOS leads Value by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LDOS or MNDY?
Analyst price targets imply +11.8% upside for LDOS and +6.9% for MNDY, so the Street currently favors LDOS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MNDY. 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, LDOS or MNDY?
LDOS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LDOS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 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, LDOS or MNDY?
LDOS 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, LDOS or MNDY?
MNDY on the Momentum factor, by 30 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, LDOS or MNDY?
LDOS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LDOS on Risk Resilience, by 6 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 LDOS more profitable than MNDY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 17.4% vs 88.7%; operating margin 11.5% vs 2.9%; ttm roe 27.6% vs 12.5%. LDOS 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 MNDY's lead over LDOS getting stronger or weaker?
MNDY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-20, when MNDY moved ahead of LDOS.
What would change the LDOS vs MNDY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LDOS closes the Momentum gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to MNDY's edge; LDOS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; MNDY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 2 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 LDOS and MNDY?
LDOS: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. MNDY: 4 bullish / 2 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 LDOS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On MNDY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare LDOS 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.