MSCI vs TRMB Stock Comparison
Compare MSCI and TRMB across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between MSCI and TRMB?
TRMB leads the current stock comparison as Trimble Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
MSCI Inc. vs Trimble Inc.
TRMB leads
TRMB leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 19 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TRMB, and its lead is narrowing.
MSCI Inc.
Trimble Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TRMB over MSCI, 55 versus 40 as of Sep 11, 2026. TRMB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while MSCI holds the stronger quality profile. TRMB also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TRMB today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. TRMB lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare MSCI Inc. and Trimble Inc. 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 MSCI and TRMB 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.
- Value24 vs 67TRMB +43
- Momentum28 vs 43TRMB +15
- Quality60 vs 56MSCI +4
- Risk Resilience53 vs 52Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TRMB. TRMB’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; MSCI keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -7
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No new signals fired.
TRMB's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MSCI and TRMB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TRMB (Trimble Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
MSCI (MSCI Inc.): the counter-case, on quality.
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
TRMBTRMB on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TRMBTRMB on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TRMBTRMB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 43 points.
Momentum
TRMBTRMB on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
MSCIMSCI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
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 | MSCI | TRMB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +27.1% | +27.5% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +20.6% | +25.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TRMB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TRMB | 40 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | TRMBon balance | revenue growth 1.9% vs 3.4%; EPS growth -15.2% vs -5.8%; TTM ROE -54.1% vs -1.9%; gross margin 83% vs 68.4%; operating margin 55.7% vs 17.5% — TRMB takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | TRMB | Value 24 vs 67 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -4.1% vs 2.1%; vs 200-day -4.4% vs -11.9% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 53 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 27.1% vs 27.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MSCI and TRMB 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 wide at 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 TRMB.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TRMB lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TRMB +15
- 40 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- TRMB +12
- 49 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- TRMB +19
- 42 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- TRMB +13
- 50 vs 63
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jun 1 when TRMB moved ahead of MSCI.
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.
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.90%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (14.30%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
MSCI 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.28%, AIQ -2 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.44%, 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.
- 1MSCI closes the Value gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to TRMB's edge.
- 2MSCI's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3TRMB starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 15-point move would eliminate TRMB'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
TRMB leads on balance| Metric | MSCI | TRMB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.9% | 3.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -15.2% | -5.8% |
| Gross margin | 83% | 68.4% |
| Operating margin | 55.7% | 17.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -54.1% | -1.9% |
| Debt to equity | -2.43 | 0.29 |
Performance
MSCI leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | MSCI | TRMB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.3% | -3.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.7% | 0.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -10% | 12.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 0.1% | -15.9% |
| Year to date | -4.6% | -27.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -4.5% | -30.1% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | MSCI | TRMB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.5 | 37.5 |
| ADX (14) | 12.5 | 20 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.1% | 2.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4.4% | -11.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26% | 30.7% |
Risk
Split| Metric | MSCI | TRMB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.4 | 1.14 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.1 | -1.03 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.13 | -1.44 |
| Max drawdown | -18.1% | -41.5% |
| Current drawdown | -14.9% | -31.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 30.7% | 32% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -3.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MSCI or TRMB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TRMB is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 55 against MSCI's 40. The edge comes from value and momentum. MSCI 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 MSCI or TRMB the better buy right now?
TRMB carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TRMB over MSCI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TRMB leads Value by 43 points; TRMB leads Momentum by 15 points; MSCI leads Quality by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MSCI or TRMB?
Analyst price targets imply +27.1% upside for MSCI and +27.5% for TRMB. 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, MSCI or TRMB?
TRMB is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TRMB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 43 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, MSCI or TRMB?
TRMB 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, MSCI or TRMB?
TRMB on the Momentum factor, by 15 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, MSCI or TRMB?
MSCI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MSCI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is MSCI more profitable than TRMB?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 83% vs 68.4%; operating margin 55.7% vs 17.5%; ttm roe -54.1% vs -1.9%. MSCI leads on two measures and TRMB 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 TRMB's lead over MSCI getting stronger or weaker?
TRMB lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-01, when TRMB moved ahead of MSCI.
What would change the MSCI vs TRMB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MSCI closes the Value gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to TRMB's edge; MSCI's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; TRMB starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 15-point move would eliminate TRMB's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about MSCI and TRMB?
MSCI: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. TRMB: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 MSCI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TRMB it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare MSCI and TRMB 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.