MTSI vs NVTS Stock Comparison
MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc. vs Navitas Semiconductor Corp
MTSI leads
MTSI leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support MTSI, and its current signal state is conflicted.
MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc.
Navitas Semiconductor Corp
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MTSI over NVTS, 42 versus 31 as of Sep 5, 2026. MTSI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while NVTS holds the stronger value profile. MTSI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MTSI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. MTSI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc. and Navitas Semiconductor Corp across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare MTSI and NVTS 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.
- Quality30%69 vs 30MTSI +39
- Value30%25 vs 34NVTS +9
- Momentum25%30 vs 25MTSI +5
- Risk Resilience15%41 vs 40Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor MTSI. MTSI’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; NVTS keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Momentum +10
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
MTSI's lead widened by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MTSI and NVTS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MTSI (MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
NVTS (Navitas Semiconductor Corp): the counter-case, on value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 69% against 62.1%.
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
MTSIMTSI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
MTSIMTSI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
NVTSNVTS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 points.
Momentum
MTSIMTSI on the Momentum factor, by 5 points.
Lower downside
MTSIMTSI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
MTSIMTSI 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 | MTSI | NVTS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +44.5% | +36.1% | MTSI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +45% | +52.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MTSI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MTSI | 42 vs 31 |
| Fundamentals | MTSIon balance | revenue growth 18.4% vs 22.5%; EPS growth 112.9% vs -5.3%; TTM ROE 17.1% vs -61.5%; gross margin 56.6% vs -1.7%; operating margin 18.1% vs -270.2% — MTSI takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | NVTS | Value 25 vs 34 |
| Technicals | MTSI | Price vs 50-day -6.8% vs -8.6%; vs 200-day 2% vs -8.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 41 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | MTSI | Target upside 44.5% vs 36.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MTSI and NVTS and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 11 points.
- 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 MTSI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4MTSI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MTSI +11
- 42 vs 31
- 7 sessions ago
- MTSI +10
- 43 vs 33
- 30 sessions ago
- MTSI +12
- 53 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- MTSI +9
- 43 vs 34
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.
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (9.47%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.75%)
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.05%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
MTSI 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 +3.46%, AIQ +3 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +6.31%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1NVTS closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to MTSI's edge.
- 2NVTS's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3MTSI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
MTSI leads on balance| Metric | MTSI | NVTS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.4% | 22.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 112.9% | -5.3% |
| Gross margin | 56.6% | -1.7% |
| Operating margin | 18.1% | -270.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.1% | -61.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.24 | 0.01 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | MTSI | NVTS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.4% | 2.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.5% | -15% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -22.1% | -53% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 29.6% | 43.9% |
| Year to date | 57% | 65.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 106.6% | 105.9% |
Technicals
MTSI has the stronger structure| Metric | MTSI | NVTS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 25.9 | 27.1 |
| ADX (14) | 19.7 | 14.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.8% | -8.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 2% | -8.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 62.1% | 69% |
Risk
Split| Metric | MTSI | NVTS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.24 | 4.61 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.43 | 1.18 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.15 | 2.4 |
| Max drawdown | -44.2% | -69.4% |
| Current drawdown | -34.4% | -62.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 60% | 126.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.7% | -9.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MTSI or NVTS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MTSI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 42 against NVTS's 31. The edge comes from quality and momentum. NVTS 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 MTSI or NVTS the better buy right now?
MTSI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MTSI over NVTS?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. MTSI leads Quality by 39 points; NVTS leads Value by 9 points; MTSI leads Momentum by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MTSI or NVTS?
Analyst price targets imply +44.5% upside for MTSI and +36.1% for NVTS, so the Street currently favors MTSI. 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, MTSI or NVTS?
NVTS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. NVTS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 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, MTSI or NVTS?
MTSI 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, MTSI or NVTS?
MTSI on the Momentum factor, by 5 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, MTSI or NVTS?
MTSI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MTSI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is MTSI more profitable than NVTS?
MTSI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 56.6% vs -1.7%; operating margin 18.1% vs -270.2%; ttm roe 17.1% vs -61.5%.
Is MTSI's lead over NVTS getting stronger or weaker?
MTSI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the MTSI vs NVTS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NVTS closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to MTSI's edge; NVTS's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; MTSI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about MTSI and NVTS?
MTSI: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. NVTS: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 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 MTSI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NVTS it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MTSI and NVTS with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.