MAXN vs QQQ Stock Comparison
MAXN currently leads QQQ in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 61 vs 57. The clearest difference is value, while QQQ has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between MAXN and QQQ?
MAXN leads the current stock comparison as Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd. vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
MAXN leads
MAXN leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value, having only recently taken the lead back from QQQ.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support MAXN, and the lead recently changed hands.
Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd.
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MAXN over QQQ, 61 versus 57 as of Oct 31, 2026. MAXN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while QQQ holds the stronger quality profile. MAXN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor MAXN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. MAXN lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MAXN now leads by 4.
Compare Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd. and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 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 MAXN and QQQ 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.
- Value75 vs 35MAXN +40
- Quality50 vs 81QQQ +31
- Risk Resilience54 vs 69QQQ +15
2 of 4 evidence groups favor MAXN. MAXN’s edge is concentrated in value; QQQ keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session.
Largest factor move: Quality -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
MAXN's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MAXN and QQQ both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MAXN (Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
QQQ (Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, 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
MAXNMAXN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
MAXNMAXN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 40 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
QQQQQQ on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | MAXN | QQQ | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +376.2% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | 0% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor MAXN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MAXN | 61 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | MAXN | Value 75 vs 35 |
| Technicals | QQQ | Price vs 50-day -88.6% vs -4.8%; vs 200-day -37.9% vs 6.9% |
| Risk Resilience | QQQ | Risk Resilience 54 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MAXN and QQQ 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 MAXN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30MAXN lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MAXN now leads by 4.
- Today
- MAXN +4
- 61 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- MAXN +11
- 61 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- QQQ +3
- 61 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- QQQ +11
- 48 vs 59
The lead changed hands 19 times in this window, most recently on Sep 8 when QQQ moved ahead of MAXN.
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.
No active signals
No signal that the other name lacks.
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only QQQ
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.88%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
QQQ 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -3.47%, 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.
- 1QQQ closes the Value gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to MAXN's edge.
- 2QQQ's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3MAXN starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
Split| Metric | MAXN | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | — |
| Gross margin | -39.2% | — |
| Operating margin | -176.3% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 20% | — |
| Debt to equity | -0.98 | — |
Performance
QQQ leads 3 of 3 windows| Metric | MAXN | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -17.7% | 0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -30.7% | -1.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | — | 6.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | — | 9.7% |
| Year to date | -52.2% | 18.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | — | 17.6% |
Technicals
QQQ has the stronger structure| Metric | MAXN | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 15.3 | 39.4 |
| ADX (14) | 22.2 | 25.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -88.6% | -4.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -37.9% | 6.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 143.7% | 19.5% |
Risk
QQQ is the more resilient| Metric | MAXN | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.55 | 1.45 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.13 | 0.59 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.63 | 0.9 |
| Max drawdown | -82.4% | -12.2% |
| Current drawdown | -80.5% | -4.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 145.5% | 20% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -12.4% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MAXN or QQQ?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MAXN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 61 against QQQ's 57. The edge comes from value. QQQ is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 MAXN or QQQ the better buy right now?
MAXN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MAXN over QQQ?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MAXN leads Value by 40 points; QQQ leads Quality by 31 points; QQQ leads Risk Resilience by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MAXN or QQQ?
Analyst price targets imply +376.2% upside for MAXN and not covered for QQQ. 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, MAXN or QQQ?
MAXN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MAXN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 40 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, MAXN or QQQ?
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, MAXN or QQQ?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, MAXN or QQQ?
QQQ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. QQQ on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 MAXN more profitable than QQQ?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is MAXN's lead over QQQ getting stronger or weaker?
MAXN lead: Reversed — QQQ led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MAXN now leads by 4. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 19 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-08, when QQQ moved ahead of MAXN.
What would change the MAXN vs QQQ verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: QQQ closes the Value gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to MAXN's edge; QQQ's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; MAXN starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 MAXN and QQQ?
MAXN: No active signals. QQQ: 2 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. On QQQ it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
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.