MAXN vs QS Stock Comparison
Compare MAXN and QS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between MAXN and QS?
MAXN leads the current stock comparison as Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd. vs QuantumScape Corporation
MAXN leads
MAXN leads by 29 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.
Stable: 4 of 5 evidence groups support MAXN.
Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd.
QuantumScape Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MAXN over QS, 61 versus 32 as of Sep 11, 2026. MAXN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. MAXN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 5 covered evidence groups favor MAXN today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. MAXN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 29 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd. and QuantumScape Corporation 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 MAXN and QS 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.
- Quality50 vs 29MAXN +21
- Risk Resilience54 vs 40MAXN +14
4 of 5 evidence groups favor MAXN. MAXN’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No new signals fired.
MAXN's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MAXN and QS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MAXN (Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
QS (QuantumScape Corporation): the counter-case, on 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
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
MAXNMAXN on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
MAXNMAXN 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 | MAXN | QS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +376.2% | +57.2% | MAXN has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 5 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 32 |
| Fundamentals | MAXN | revenue growth 0% vs 0%; EPS growth 0% vs 0%; TTM ROE 20% vs -35.7% |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | QS | Price vs 50-day -88.6% vs -10.3%; vs 200-day -37.9% vs -34.5% |
| Risk Resilience | MAXN | Risk Resilience 54 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | MAXN | Target upside 376.2% vs 57.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MAXN and QS and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 29 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 4 of 5 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 MAXN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MAXN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 29 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MAXN +29
- 61 vs 32
- 7 sessions ago
- MAXN +30
- 61 vs 31
- 30 sessions ago
- MAXN +30
- 70 vs 40
- 90 sessions ago
- MAXN +36
- 70 vs 34
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.
No active signals
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (34.28%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long 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 +1.93%, 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.
- 1QS closes the Quality gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to MAXN's edge.
- 2QS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend 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
MAXN leads on balance| Metric | MAXN | QS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0% | 0% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | 0% |
| Gross margin | -39.2% | 0% |
| Operating margin | -176.3% | 0% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 20% | -35.7% |
| Debt to equity | -0.98 | 0.06 |
Performance
QS leads 3 of 3 windows| Metric | MAXN | QS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -17.7% | -5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -30.7% | -18.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | — | -26% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | — | -26% |
| Year to date | -52.2% | -50.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | — | -45.4% |
Technicals
QS has the stronger structure| Metric | MAXN | QS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 15.3 | 36.2 |
| ADX (14) | 22.2 | 10.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -88.6% | -10.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -37.9% | -34.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 143.7% | 48.3% |
Risk
MAXN is the more resilient| Metric | MAXN | QS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.7 | 3.28 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.1 | -0.25 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.57 | -0.43 |
| Max drawdown | -84.1% | -73.5% |
| Current drawdown | -82.3% | -71.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 134% | 82.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -11.9% | -7.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MAXN or QS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MAXN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 61 against QS's 32. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 QS the better buy right now?
MAXN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MAXN over QS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MAXN leads Quality by 21 points; MAXN leads Risk Resilience by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MAXN or QS?
Analyst price targets imply +376.2% upside for MAXN and +57.2% for QS, so the Street currently favors MAXN. 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 QS?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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 QS?
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 QS?
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 QS?
MAXN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MAXN on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 QS?
MAXN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin -39.2% vs 0%; operating margin -176.3% vs 0%; ttm roe 20% vs -35.7%.
Is MAXN's lead over QS getting stronger or weaker?
MAXN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 29 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the MAXN vs QS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: QS closes the Quality gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to MAXN's edge; QS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend 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 QS?
MAXN: No active signals. QS: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral. On QS it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare MAXN and QS 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.