MRNA vs OGN Stock Comparison
OGN currently leads MRNA in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 64 vs 46. The clearest difference is value, while MRNA has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between MRNA and OGN?
OGN leads the current stock comparison as Organon & Co., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Moderna, Inc. vs Organon & Co.
OGN leads
OGN leads by 18 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support OGN, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Moderna, Inc.
Organon & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors OGN over MRNA, 64 versus 46 as of Oct 21, 2026. OGN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while MRNA holds the stronger momentum profile. OGN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor OGN today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. OGN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Moderna, Inc. and Organon & Co. 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 MRNA and OGN 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.
- Value34 vs 75OGN +41
- Quality27 vs 47OGN +20
- Risk Resilience54 vs 70OGN +16
- Momentum78 vs 69MRNA +9
5 of 6 evidence groups favor OGN. OGN’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; MRNA keeps a meaningful momentum 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 +9
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
OGN's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MRNA and OGN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
OGN (Organon & Co.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
MRNA (Moderna, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 87.1% against 3.3%.
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
OGNOGN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
OGNOGN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 points.
Momentum
MRNAMRNA on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
OGNOGN on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
OGNOGN 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 | MRNA | OGN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -61.1% | +1.8% | OGN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +230.1% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor OGN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | OGN | 46 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | OGNon balance | revenue growth -62.7% vs 6.7%; EPS growth 42.4% vs -25.5%; TTM ROE -39.2% vs 23.4%; gross margin -12.6% vs 53%; operating margin -149% vs 19.3% — OGN takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | OGN | Value 34 vs 75 |
| Technicals | MRNA | Price vs 50-day 51.8% vs 0.2%; vs 200-day 204.7% vs 22.2% |
| Risk Resilience | OGN | Risk Resilience 54 vs 70 |
| Analyst expectations | OGN | Target upside -61.1% vs 1.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MRNA and OGN 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 18 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 OGN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20OGN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- OGN +18
- 46 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- OGN +17
- 46 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- OGN +18
- 48 vs 66
- 90 sessions ago
- OGN +21
- 46 vs 67
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only MRNA
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.39%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only OGN
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.33%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, 52-Week High Proximity, Uptrend Structure Active.
OGN 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.54%, AIQ +2 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.07%, 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.
- 1MRNA closes the Value gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to OGN's edge.
- 2MRNA's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3OGN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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
OGN leads on balance| Metric | MRNA | OGN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -62.7% | 6.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 42.4% | -25.5% |
| Gross margin | -12.6% | 53% |
| Operating margin | -149% | 19.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -39.2% | 23.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.19 | 8.5 |
Performance
MRNA leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | MRNA | OGN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 11.9% | -0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 32.6% | 0.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 280.9% | 1.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 334% | 55.7% |
| Year to date | 667% | 91.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 787.7% | 46.7% |
Technicals
MRNA has the stronger structure| Metric | MRNA | OGN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 66.8 | 58.8 |
| ADX (14) | 61.9 | 23.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 51.8% | 0.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 204.7% | 22.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 87.1% | 3.3% |
Risk
OGN is the more resilient| Metric | MRNA | OGN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.03 | 0.55 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.69 | 0.85 |
| Sortino ratio | 6.82 | 1.24 |
| Max drawdown | -34.2% | -41.6% |
| Current drawdown | 0% | -0.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 193.8% | 66.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.9% | -4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MRNA or OGN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, OGN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 64 against MRNA's 46. The edge comes from value and quality. MRNA 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 MRNA or OGN the better buy right now?
OGN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 of 6 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 OGN over MRNA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. OGN leads Value by 41 points; OGN leads Quality by 20 points; OGN leads Risk Resilience by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MRNA or OGN?
Analyst price targets imply -61.1% upside for MRNA and +1.8% for OGN, so the Street currently favors OGN. 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, MRNA or OGN?
OGN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. OGN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 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, MRNA or OGN?
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, MRNA or OGN?
MRNA on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, MRNA or OGN?
OGN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. OGN on Risk Resilience, by 16 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 MRNA more profitable than OGN?
OGN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin -12.6% vs 53%; operating margin -149% vs 19.3%; ttm roe -39.2% vs 23.4%.
Is OGN's lead over MRNA getting stronger or weaker?
OGN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the MRNA vs OGN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MRNA closes the Value gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to OGN's edge; MRNA's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; OGN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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 MRNA and OGN?
MRNA: 5 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. OGN: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, 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 MRNA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On OGN it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MRNA and OGN 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.