MSFT vs OGN Stock Comparison
MSFT currently leads OGN in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 67 vs 64. The clearest difference is quality, while OGN has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between MSFT and OGN?
MSFT leads the current stock comparison as Microsoft Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Microsoft Corporation vs Organon & Co.
MSFT leads
MSFT leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support MSFT.
Microsoft Corporation
Organon & Co.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MSFT over OGN, 67 versus 64 as of Oct 21, 2026. MSFT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while OGN holds the stronger value profile. MSFT also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MSFT today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points.
Compare Microsoft Corporation and Organon & Co. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare MSFT 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.
- Quality89 vs 47MSFT +42
- Value44 vs 75OGN +31
- Risk Resilience67 vs 70Even
- Momentum70 vs 69Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor MSFT. MSFT’s edge is concentrated in quality; OGN keeps a meaningful value edge.
The central trade-off
MSFT (Microsoft Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
OGN (Organon & Co.): the counter-case, on value, valuation.
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
MSFTMSFT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MSFTMSFT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
OGNOGN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
OGNOGN carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
MSFTMSFT 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 | MSFT | OGN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +6% | +1.8% | MSFT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +57.5% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 24 | 1 | 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 MSFT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 67 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | MSFT | revenue growth 8.6% vs 6.7%; EPS growth 12.4% vs -25.5%; TTM ROE 33.2% vs 23.4%; gross margin 67.9% vs 53%; operating margin 46.8% vs 19.3% |
| Valuation | OGN | Value 44 vs 75 |
| Technicals | MSFT | Price vs 50-day 5.2% vs 0.2%; vs 200-day 22% vs 22.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 67 vs 70 |
| Analyst expectations | MSFT | Target upside 6% vs 1.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MSFT and OGN 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 MSFT.
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.
- 1OGN closes the Quality gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to MSFT's edge.
- 2OGN generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3MSFT 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
MSFT leads on balance| Metric | MSFT | OGN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.6% | 6.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 12.4% | -25.5% |
| Gross margin | 67.9% | 53% |
| Operating margin | 46.8% | 19.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 33.2% | 23.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.29 | 8.5 |
Performance
OGN leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | MSFT | OGN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.1% | -0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 6.8% | 0.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 36.3% | 1.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 25.4% | 55.7% |
| Year to date | 10% | 91.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 4% | 46.7% |
Technicals
MSFT has the stronger structure| Metric | MSFT | OGN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.3 | 58.8 |
| ADX (14) | 34.6 | 23.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 5.2% | 0.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 22% | 22.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.7% | 3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MSFT or OGN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MSFT is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 67 against OGN's 64. The edge comes from quality. OGN is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 MSFT or OGN the better buy right now?
MSFT carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MSFT over OGN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MSFT leads Quality by 42 points; OGN leads Value by 31 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MSFT or OGN?
Analyst price targets imply +6% upside for MSFT and +1.8% for OGN, so the Street currently favors MSFT. 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, MSFT or OGN?
OGN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. OGN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 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, MSFT or OGN?
MSFT 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, MSFT or OGN?
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, MSFT or OGN?
OGN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. OGN 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 MSFT more profitable than OGN?
MSFT leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 67.9% vs 53%; operating margin 46.8% vs 19.3%; ttm roe 33.2% vs 23.4%.
What would change the MSFT vs OGN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: OGN closes the Quality gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to MSFT's edge; OGN generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; MSFT 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.
Compare MSFT 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.