LITE vs MBLY Stock Comparison
Lumentum Holdings Inc. vs Mobileye Global Inc.
MBLY leads
MBLY leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support MBLY, and its lead is widening.
Lumentum Holdings Inc.
Mobileye Global Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MBLY over LITE, 43 versus 35 as of Sep 5, 2026. MBLY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while LITE holds the stronger momentum profile. MBLY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MBLY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. MBLY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Lumentum Holdings Inc. and Mobileye Global Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare LITE and MBLY 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%39 vs 65MBLY +26
- Value30%24 vs 35MBLY +11
- Quality30%43 vs 51MBLY +8
- Momentum25%38 vs 30LITE +8
4 of 6 evidence groups favor MBLY. MBLY’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; LITE keeps a meaningful momentum 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 -1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No new signals fired.
MBLY's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LITE and MBLY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MBLY (Mobileye Global Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
LITE (Lumentum Holdings Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 96.5% against 34.3%.
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
MBLYMBLY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
MBLYMBLY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MBLYMBLY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
LITELITE on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
MBLYMBLY on Risk Resilience, by 26 points.
Analyst upside
MBLYMBLY 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 | LITE | MBLY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16.9% | +31.7% | MBLY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +54.3% | +97.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 13 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MBLY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MBLY | 35 vs 43 |
| Fundamentals | LITEon balance | revenue growth 24.5% vs -9%; EPS growth -49.3% vs 99.4%; TTM ROE -3% vs -40.4%; gross margin 41.7% vs 47.4%; operating margin 17.4% vs -19.2% — LITE takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | MBLY | Value 24 vs 35 |
| Technicals | LITE | Price vs 50-day 7.9% vs -2.7%; vs 200-day 28.6% vs -7.4% |
| Risk Resilience | MBLY | Risk Resilience 39 vs 65 |
| Analyst expectations | MBLY | Target upside 16.9% vs 31.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LITE and MBLY 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 8 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 MBLY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4MBLY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MBLY +8
- 35 vs 43
- 7 sessions ago
- LITE +1
- 46 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- MBLY +1
- 47 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- MBLY +16
- 33 vs 49
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Sep 1 when MBLY moved ahead of LITE.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (19.14%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (5.15%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.34%)
LITE 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +4%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.88%, 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.
- 1LITE closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to MBLY's edge.
- 2LITE generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3MBLY 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
LITE leads on balance| Metric | LITE | MBLY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 24.5% | -9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -49.3% | 99.4% |
| Gross margin | 41.7% | 47.4% |
| Operating margin | 17.4% | -19.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -3% | -40.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.36 | 0 |
Performance
LITE leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | LITE | MBLY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.5% | -0.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1% | -1.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2% | -9.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 57.8% | 2.9% |
| Year to date | 139.1% | -18% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 557.1% | -37.5% |
Technicals
LITE has the stronger structure| Metric | LITE | MBLY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 42.1 | 36.1 |
| ADX (14) | 9.1 | 12.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7.9% | -2.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 28.6% | -7.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 96.5% | 34.3% |
Risk
MBLY is the more resilient| Metric | LITE | MBLY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.01 | 2.2 |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.33 | -0.76 |
| Sortino ratio | 4.29 | -1.18 |
| Max drawdown | -42.8% | -57.8% |
| Current drawdown | -16.3% | -44.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 97.1% | 56.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -8.6% | -5.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LITE or MBLY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MBLY is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 43 against LITE's 35. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. LITE is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 LITE or MBLY the better buy right now?
MBLY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MBLY over LITE?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. MBLY leads Risk Resilience by 26 points; MBLY leads Value by 11 points; MBLY leads Quality by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LITE or MBLY?
Analyst price targets imply +16.9% upside for LITE and +31.7% for MBLY, so the Street currently favors MBLY. 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, LITE or MBLY?
MBLY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MBLY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, LITE or MBLY?
MBLY 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, LITE or MBLY?
LITE on the Momentum factor, by 8 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, LITE or MBLY?
MBLY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MBLY on Risk Resilience, by 26 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 LITE more profitable than MBLY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 41.7% vs 47.4%; operating margin 17.4% vs -19.2%; ttm roe -3% vs -40.4%. LITE leads on two measures and MBLY 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 MBLY's lead over LITE getting stronger or weaker?
MBLY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 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 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-01, when MBLY moved ahead of LITE.
What would change the LITE vs MBLY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LITE closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to MBLY's edge; LITE generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; MBLY 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 LITE and MBLY?
LITE: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. MBLY: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 LITE is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On MBLY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare LITE and MBLY 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.