LDOS vs TRMB Stock Comparison
Leidos Holdings, Inc. vs Trimble Inc.
TRMB leads
TRMB leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 0 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TRMB, and its lead is widening.
Leidos Holdings, Inc.
Trimble Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TRMB over LDOS, 61 versus 53 as of Sep 5, 2026. TRMB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while LDOS holds the stronger value profile. TRMB also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TRMB today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. TRMB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Leidos Holdings, Inc. and Trimble Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare LDOS and TRMB 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.
- Momentum25%36 vs 67TRMB +31
- Quality30%47 vs 56TRMB +9
- Value30%73 vs 67LDOS +6
- Risk Resilience15%51 vs 52Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TRMB. TRMB’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; LDOS keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No new signals fired.
TRMB's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LDOS and TRMB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TRMB (Trimble Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
LDOS (Leidos Holdings, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation.
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
TRMBTRMB on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
LDOSLDOS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
LDOSLDOS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
TRMBTRMB on the Momentum factor, by 31 points.
Lower downside
LDOSLDOS carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
TRMBTRMB 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 | LDOS | TRMB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +12.7% | +23.6% | TRMB has more room |
| Target dispersion | +50% | +25.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TRMB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TRMB | 53 vs 61 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 3.6% vs 3.4%; EPS growth 8.1% vs -5.8%; TTM ROE 27.6% vs -1.9%; gross margin 17.4% vs 68.4%; operating margin 11.5% vs 17.5% |
| Valuation | LDOS | Value 73 vs 67 |
| Technicals | TRMB | Price vs 50-day 8.2% vs 6.1%; vs 200-day -13.1% vs -8.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 51 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | TRMB | Target upside 12.7% vs 23.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LDOS and TRMB 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 8 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 TRMB.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4TRMB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TRMB +8
- 53 vs 61
- 7 sessions ago
- TRMB +7
- 56 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 63 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- TRMB +12
- 49 vs 61
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 20 when TRMB 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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (24.54%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (15.61%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
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 +0.52%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.05%, 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 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to TRMB's edge.
- 2LDOS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TRMB starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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 | LDOS | TRMB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.6% | 3.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 8.1% | -5.8% |
| Gross margin | 17.4% | 68.4% |
| Operating margin | 11.5% | 17.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 27.6% | -1.9% |
| Debt to equity | 1.24 | 0.29 |
Performance
TRMB leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | LDOS | TRMB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.4% | -2.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.3% | -0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 6.9% | 9.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -25.2% | -15.1% |
| Year to date | -26.2% | -24.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -25.1% | -24.3% |
Technicals
TRMB has the stronger structure| Metric | LDOS | TRMB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 35.2 | 64.9 |
| ADX (14) | 33.9 | 24.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 8.2% | 6.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -13.1% | -8.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.3% | 31.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | LDOS | TRMB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.41 | 1.13 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.81 | -0.88 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.07 | -1.22 |
| Max drawdown | -49.9% | -41.5% |
| Current drawdown | -33.3% | -28.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.2% | 32% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.1% | -3.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LDOS or TRMB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TRMB is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 61 against LDOS's 53. 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 TRMB the better buy right now?
TRMB carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 TRMB over LDOS?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. TRMB leads Momentum by 31 points; TRMB leads Quality by 9 points; LDOS leads Value by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LDOS or TRMB?
Analyst price targets imply +12.7% upside for LDOS and +23.6% for TRMB, so the Street currently favors TRMB. 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, LDOS or TRMB?
LDOS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LDOS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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 TRMB?
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 TRMB?
TRMB on the Momentum factor, by 31 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, LDOS or TRMB?
LDOS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LDOS carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is LDOS more profitable than TRMB?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 17.4% vs 68.4%; operating margin 11.5% vs 17.5%; ttm roe 27.6% vs -1.9%. LDOS leads on one measure and TRMB 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 TRMB's lead over LDOS getting stronger or weaker?
TRMB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-20, when TRMB moved ahead of LDOS.
What would change the LDOS vs TRMB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LDOS closes the Momentum gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to TRMB's edge; LDOS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TRMB starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 LDOS and TRMB?
LDOS: 0 bullish / 2 bearish. TRMB: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on LDOS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TRMB it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare LDOS and TRMB with others
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.