LKQ vs MSI Stock Comparison
Compare LKQ and MSI across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between LKQ and MSI?
MSI leads the current stock comparison as Motorola Solutions, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
LKQ Corporation vs Motorola Solutions, Inc.
MSI leads
MSI leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors LKQ on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support MSI, and its current signal state is conflicted.
LKQ Corporation
Motorola Solutions, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MSI over LKQ, 52 versus 49 as of Sep 11, 2026. MSI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while LKQ holds the stronger value profile. MSI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors LKQ. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MSI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. MSI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare LKQ Corporation and Motorola Solutions, Inc. 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 LKQ and MSI 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.
- Quality42 vs 62MSI +20
- Value71 vs 51LKQ +20
- Momentum24 vs 39MSI +15
- Risk Resilience58 vs 59Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor MSI. MSI’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; LKQ keeps a meaningful value edge.
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 -2
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No new signals fired.
MSI's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LKQ and MSI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MSI (Motorola Solutions, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
LKQ (LKQ Corporation): the counter-case, on value, valuation, 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
MSIMSI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
LKQLKQ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
MSIMSI on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
MSIMSI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
LKQLKQ on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors MSI, analyst targets favor LKQ. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | LKQ | MSI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +28.9% | +12.6% | LKQ has more room |
| Target dispersion | +37% | +14.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 6 | 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 MSI. 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 | 49 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | MSIon balance | revenue growth -1.8% vs 15.4%; EPS growth 71% vs 52%; TTM ROE 7.1% vs 85.8%; gross margin 37.7% vs 50%; operating margin 6.8% vs 25% — MSI takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LKQ | Value 71 vs 51 |
| Technicals | MSI | Price vs 50-day -4.1% vs 4.1%; vs 200-day -17.7% vs 9.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 58 vs 59 |
| Analyst expectations | LKQ | Target upside 28.9% vs 12.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LKQ and MSI 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 leader is throwing conflicting signals. (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 MSI.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MSI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MSI +3
- 49 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 57 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- MSI +4
- 59 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- MSI +11
- 53 vs 64
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Jul 22 when LKQ moved ahead of MSI.
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 / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (14.18%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.59%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
MSI 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 +2.03%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.49%, 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.
- 1LKQ closes the Quality gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to MSI's edge.
- 2LKQ's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3MSI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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
MSI leads on balance| Metric | LKQ | MSI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -1.8% | 15.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 71% | 52% |
| Gross margin | 37.7% | 50% |
| Operating margin | 6.8% | 25% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.1% | 85.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.82 | 3.6 |
Performance
MSI leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | LKQ | MSI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.4% | -3.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.4% | -1.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.2% | 12.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -23.7% | 0.3% |
| Year to date | -21.8% | 21% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -27.5% | -3% |
Technicals
MSI has the stronger structure| Metric | LKQ | MSI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 27 | 41.4 |
| ADX (14) | 9.8 | 29.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.1% | 4.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -17.7% | 9.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.2% | 22% |
Risk
Split| Metric | LKQ | MSI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.6 | 0.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.83 | -0.13 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.03 | -0.17 |
| Max drawdown | -35.5% | -25.8% |
| Current drawdown | -32.1% | -5.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 35% | 26.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LKQ or MSI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MSI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 52 against LKQ's 49. The edge comes from quality and momentum. LKQ 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 LKQ or MSI the better buy right now?
MSI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 MSI over LKQ?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MSI leads Quality by 20 points; LKQ leads Value by 20 points; MSI leads Momentum by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LKQ or MSI?
Analyst price targets imply +28.9% upside for LKQ and +12.6% for MSI, so the Street currently favors LKQ. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MSI. 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, LKQ or MSI?
LKQ is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LKQ 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, LKQ or MSI?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, LKQ or MSI?
MSI on the Momentum factor, by 15 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, LKQ or MSI?
MSI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MSI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is LKQ more profitable than MSI?
MSI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 37.7% vs 50%; operating margin 6.8% vs 25%; ttm roe 7.1% vs 85.8%.
Is MSI's lead over LKQ getting stronger or weaker?
MSI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-22, when LKQ moved ahead of MSI.
What would change the LKQ vs MSI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LKQ closes the Quality gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to MSI's edge; LKQ's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; MSI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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 LKQ and MSI?
LKQ: 2 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. MSI: 3 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 LKQ is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On MSI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare LKQ and MSI 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.