MMM vs NDSN Stock Comparison
MMM currently leads NDSN in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 62 vs 57. The clearest difference is momentum, while NDSN has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between MMM and NDSN?
MMM leads the current stock comparison as 3M Company, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
3M Company vs Nordson Corporation
MMM leads
MMM leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from NDSN. Wall Street currently favors NDSN on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support MMM, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
3M Company
Nordson Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MMM over NDSN, 62 versus 57 as of Oct 21, 2026. MMM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while NDSN holds the stronger risk resilience profile. MMM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors NDSN. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MMM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. MMM lead: Reversed — NDSN led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MMM now leads by 5.
Compare 3M Company and Nordson Corporation 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 MMM and NDSN 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.
- Momentum75 vs 57MMM +18
- Value56 vs 40MMM +16
- Risk Resilience61 vs 74NDSN +13
- Quality58 vs 64NDSN +6
2 of 6 evidence groups favor MMM. MMM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; NDSN keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +37
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
The lead changed hands: MMM moved ahead of NDSN in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MMM and NDSN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MMM (3M Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
NDSN (Nordson Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality, fundamentals.
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
MMMMMM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MMMMMM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MMMMMM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 points.
Momentum
MMMMMM on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
NDSNNDSN on Risk Resilience, by 13 points.
Analyst upside
NDSNNDSN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors MMM, analyst targets favor NDSN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | MMM | NDSN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +5.5% | +7.4% | NDSN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +39.6% | +11.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 5 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | MMM | NDSN |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | -9.90% | 20.91% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $4.916 | $1.540 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.920 | $3.980 |
| Years increased | 3 | 4 |
| No cut in window | No (2) | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
NDSN grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 20.91% a year against MMM's -9.90%.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MMM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MMM | 62 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | NDSNon balance | revenue growth 7.8% vs 10.4%; EPS growth 45.5% vs 30.5%; TTM ROE 77.1% vs 17.6%; gross margin 39.4% vs 55.3%; operating margin 19% vs 26.9% — NDSN takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | MMM | Value 56 vs 40 |
| Technicals | NDSN | Price vs 50-day 3% vs 3.1%; vs 200-day 6.6% vs 11.8% |
| Risk Resilience | NDSN | Risk Resilience 61 vs 74 |
| Analyst expectations | NDSN | Target upside 5.5% vs 7.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MMM and NDSN 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)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (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 MMM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20MMM lead: Reversed — NDSN led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MMM now leads by 5.
- Today
- MMM +5
- 62 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- NDSN +5
- 54 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- NDSN +4
- 58 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- NDSN +4
- 57 vs 61
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Oct 20 when MMM moved ahead of NDSN.
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 / 0 bearish
Only MMM
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only NDSN
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, Uptrend Structure Active.
NDSN 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.97%, AIQ +9 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.39%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1NDSN closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to MMM's edge.
- 2NDSN generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3MMM's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
NDSN leads on balance| Metric | MMM | NDSN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 7.8% | 10.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 45.5% | 30.5% |
| Gross margin | 39.4% | 55.3% |
| Operating margin | 19% | 26.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 77.1% | 17.6% |
| Debt to equity | 4.25 | 0.55 |
Performance
NDSN leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | MMM | NDSN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5.3% | -1.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.2% | 2.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.4% | 12.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 15.4% | 15.7% |
| Year to date | 7% | 36% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 13.2% | 41% |
Technicals
NDSN has the stronger structure| Metric | MMM | NDSN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.6 | 48.6 |
| ADX (14) | 28.1 | 18.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3% | 3.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.6% | 11.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28% | 14.7% |
Risk
NDSN is the more resilient| Metric | MMM | NDSN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.68 | 0.84 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.42 | 1.48 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.74 | 2.6 |
| Max drawdown | -19.1% | -14.4% |
| Current drawdown | -6.8% | -2.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.9% | 21.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.3% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MMM or NDSN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MMM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 62 against NDSN's 57. The edge comes from momentum and value. NDSN is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 MMM or NDSN the better buy right now?
MMM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MMM over NDSN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MMM leads Momentum by 18 points; MMM leads Value by 16 points; NDSN leads Risk Resilience by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MMM or NDSN?
Analyst price targets imply +5.5% upside for MMM and +7.4% for NDSN, so the Street currently favors NDSN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MMM. 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, MMM or NDSN?
MMM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MMM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 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, MMM or NDSN?
MMM 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, MMM or NDSN?
MMM on the Momentum factor, by 18 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, MMM or NDSN?
NDSN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NDSN on Risk Resilience, by 13 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 MMM more profitable than NDSN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 39.4% vs 55.3%; operating margin 19% vs 26.9%; ttm roe 77.1% vs 17.6%. MMM leads on one measure and NDSN on two measures, 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 MMM's lead over NDSN getting stronger or weaker?
MMM lead: Reversed — NDSN led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MMM now leads by 5. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-10-20, when MMM moved ahead of NDSN.
What would change the MMM vs NDSN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NDSN closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to MMM's edge; NDSN generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; MMM's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 MMM and NDSN?
MMM: 3 bullish / 0 bearish. NDSN: 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 MMM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NDSN it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MMM and NDSN 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.