MA vs AXP Stock Comparison
Mastercard Incorporated vs American Express Company
AXP leads
AXP leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 10 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support AXP, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Mastercard Incorporated
American Express Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AXP over MA, 50 versus 45 as of Sep 2, 2026. AXP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while MA holds the stronger momentum profile. AXP also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AXP today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. AXP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Mastercard Incorporated and American Express Company across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
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%78 vs 27MA +51
- Quality30%32 vs 68AXP +36
- Value30%24 vs 39AXP +15
- Risk Resilience15%60 vs 74AXP +14
4 of 6 evidence groups favor AXP. AXP’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; MA keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-01, compared against the prior scored session 2026-08-31.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
AXP's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MA and AXP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AXP (American Express Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
MA (Mastercard Incorporated): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals.
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
AXPAXP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
MAMA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AXPAXP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
MAMA on the Momentum factor, by 51 points.
Lower downside
AXPAXP on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
AXPAXP 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 | MA | AXP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.5% | +12.6% | AXP has more room |
| Target dispersion | +28.6% | +27% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 11 | 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 AXP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AXP | 45 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | MAon balance | revenue growth 10.5% vs 3.4%; EPS growth 14.5% vs 6.1%; ROE 232.5% vs 34.1%; gross margin 82.7% vs 84.3%; operating margin 59.4% vs 27.2% — MA takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AXP | Value 24 vs 39 |
| Technicals | MA | Price vs 50-day 6.9% vs -3.9%; vs 200-day 11.3% vs -2.2% |
| Risk Resilience | AXP | Risk Resilience 60 vs 74 |
| Analyst expectations | AXP | Target upside 10.5% vs 12.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MA and AXP 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 AXP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 20 – Sep 1AXP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AXP +5
- 45 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- AXP +4
- 47 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- AXP +10
- 44 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- AXP +22
- 41 vs 63
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.
5 bullish / 0 bearish
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.86%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.1%)
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.40%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
AXP 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 +1.23%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.52%, 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.
- 1MA closes the Quality gap — currently 36 points behind, the largest single contributor to AXP's edge.
- 2MA's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3AXP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate AXP's advantage entirely.
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
MA leads on balance| Metric | MA | AXP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.5% | 3.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 14.5% | 6.1% |
| Gross margin | 82.7% | 84.3% |
| Operating margin | 59.4% | 27.2% |
| Return on equity | 232.5% | 34.1% |
| Debt to equity | 4.39 | 1.72 |
Technicals
MA has the stronger structure| Metric | MA | AXP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 68.6 | 35.7 |
| ADX (14) | 37.4 | 10.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.9% | -3.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 11.3% | -2.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 19.5% | 16.1% |
Risk
AXP is the more resilient| Metric | MA | AXP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.28 | 0.95 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.07 | 0.02 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.11 | 0.03 |
| Max drawdown | -21.2% | -24.1% |
| Current drawdown | -1.8% | -14.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.6% | 26.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MA or AXP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AXP is the stronger of the two as of Sep 2, 2026, scoring 50 against MA's 45. The edge comes from quality and value. MA 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 MA or AXP the better buy right now?
AXP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 2, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AXP over MA?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. MA leads Momentum by 51 points; AXP leads Quality by 36 points; AXP leads Value by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MA or AXP?
Analyst price targets imply +10.5% upside for MA and +12.6% for AXP, so the Street currently favors AXP. 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, MA or AXP?
AXP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AXP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, MA or AXP?
MA 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, MA or AXP?
MA on the Momentum factor, by 51 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, MA or AXP?
AXP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AXP on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 MA more profitable than AXP?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 82.7% vs 84.3%; operating margin 59.4% vs 27.2%; roe 232.5% vs 34.1%. MA leads on two measures and AXP 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 AXP's lead over MA getting stronger or weaker?
AXP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 5 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-20 and 2026-09-01. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the MA vs AXP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MA closes the Quality gap — currently 36 points behind, the largest single contributor to AXP's edge; MA's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; AXP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate AXP's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about MA and AXP?
MA: 5 bullish / 0 bearish. AXP: 1 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 MA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On AXP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MA and AXP 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.