MSGS vs TKO Stock Comparison
MSGS currently leads TKO in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 46 vs 40. The clearest difference is momentum, while TKO has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between MSGS and TKO?
MSGS leads the current stock comparison as Madison Square Garden Sports Corp., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. vs TKO Group Holdings, Inc.
MSGS leads
MSGS leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 17 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors TKO on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support MSGS, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.
TKO Group Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MSGS over TKO, 46 versus 40 as of Oct 22, 2026. MSGS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while TKO holds the stronger risk resilience profile. MSGS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TKO. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MSGS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. MSGS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Madison Square Garden Sports Corp. and TKO Group Holdings, Inc. 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 MSGS and TKO 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.
- Momentum67 vs 43MSGS +24
- Risk Resilience40 vs 55TKO +15
- Value34 vs 30MSGS +4
- Quality42 vs 39Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor MSGS. MSGS’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; TKO 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 +19
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
MSGS's lead widened by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MSGS and TKO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MSGS (Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
TKO (TKO Group Holdings, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, analyst expectations.
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
MSGSMSGS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MSGSMSGS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MSGSMSGS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
MSGSMSGS on the Momentum factor, by 24 points.
Lower downside
TKOTKO on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
TKOTKO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors MSGS, analyst targets favor TKO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | MSGS | TKO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +12.6% | +28.1% | TKO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +38.8% | +13.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 6 | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MSGS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MSGS | 46 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | TKOon balance | revenue growth -35.5% vs -3.1%; EPS growth 242.2% vs 17.2%; TTM ROE -2.7% vs 6.4%; gross margin 27.7% vs 54.1%; operating margin 2.5% vs 20% — TKO takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | MSGS | Value 34 vs 30 |
| Technicals | MSGS | Price vs 50-day 3.1% vs -4.4%; vs 200-day 16.7% vs -7.6% |
| Risk Resilience | TKO | Risk Resilience 40 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | TKO | Target upside 12.6% vs 28.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MSGS and TKO 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 moderate at 6 points.
- 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 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 MSGS.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20MSGS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MSGS +6
- 46 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- MSGS +8
- 45 vs 37
- 30 sessions ago
- MSGS +17
- 51 vs 34
- 90 sessions ago
- MSGS +3
- 49 vs 46
The lead changed hands 12 times in this window, most recently on Sep 18 when MSGS moved ahead of TKO.
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 / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only MSGS
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.88%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted
Only TKO
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.43%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.8%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
MSGS 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 is down while the AIQ Score moved up 5 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.25%, AIQ +5 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.95%, 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.
- 1TKO closes the Momentum gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to MSGS's edge.
- 2TKO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3MSGS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 11 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate MSGS'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
TKO leads on balance| Metric | MSGS | TKO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -35.5% | -3.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 242.2% | 17.2% |
| Gross margin | 27.7% | 54.1% |
| Operating margin | 2.5% | 20% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -2.7% | 6.4% |
| Debt to equity | -4.34 | 1.46 |
Performance
MSGS leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | MSGS | TKO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.3% | 3.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4.2% | -4.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.1% | -1.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 23.6% | -1.9% |
| Year to date | 59.8% | -14% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 89.3% | -4.4% |
Technicals
MSGS has the stronger structure| Metric | MSGS | TKO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 56.8 | 49.9 |
| ADX (14) | 13.4 | 24.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3.1% | -4.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 16.7% | -7.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 24.9% | 25% |
Risk
TKO is the more resilient| Metric | MSGS | TKO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.5 | 0.44 |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.16 | -0.13 |
| Sortino ratio | 4.37 | -0.21 |
| Max drawdown | -10.1% | -23.4% |
| Current drawdown | -0.7% | -20.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 29.7% | 31.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MSGS or TKO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MSGS is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 46 against TKO's 40. The edge comes from momentum and value. TKO 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 MSGS or TKO the better buy right now?
MSGS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 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 MSGS over TKO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MSGS leads Momentum by 24 points; TKO leads Risk Resilience by 15 points; MSGS leads Value by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MSGS or TKO?
Analyst price targets imply +12.6% upside for MSGS and +28.1% for TKO, so the Street currently favors TKO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MSGS. 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, MSGS or TKO?
MSGS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MSGS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 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, MSGS or TKO?
MSGS 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, MSGS or TKO?
MSGS on the Momentum factor, by 24 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, MSGS or TKO?
TKO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TKO on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 MSGS more profitable than TKO?
TKO leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 27.7% vs 54.1%; operating margin 2.5% vs 20%; ttm roe -2.7% vs 6.4%.
Is MSGS's lead over TKO getting stronger or weaker?
MSGS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 12 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-18, when MSGS moved ahead of TKO.
What would change the MSGS vs TKO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TKO closes the Momentum gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to MSGS's edge; TKO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; MSGS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 11 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate MSGS's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about MSGS and TKO?
MSGS: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. TKO: 1 bullish / 3 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 MSGS is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TKO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare MSGS and TKO 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.