NVTS vs RMBS Stock Comparison
RMBS currently leads NVTS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 47 vs 31. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between NVTS and RMBS?
RMBS leads the current stock comparison as Rambus Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Navitas Semiconductor Corp vs Rambus Inc.
RMBS leads
RMBS leads by 16 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 25 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors NVTS on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support RMBS, and its lead is narrowing.
Navitas Semiconductor Corp
Rambus Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors RMBS over NVTS, 47 versus 31 as of Oct 21, 2026. RMBS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value. RMBS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors NVTS. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RMBS today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. RMBS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 16 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Navitas Semiconductor Corp and Rambus Inc. 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 NVTS and RMBS 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 vs 77RMBS +47
- Value34 vs 40RMBS +6
- Momentum24 vs 21Even
- Risk Resilience40 vs 42Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor RMBS. RMBS’s edge is concentrated in quality and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
RMBS's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NVTS and RMBS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
RMBS (Rambus Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
NVTS (Navitas Semiconductor Corp): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 69.6% against 54.4%.
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
RMBSRMBS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
RMBSRMBS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
RMBSRMBS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
RMBSRMBS carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
NVTSNVTS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors RMBS, analyst targets favor NVTS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | NVTS | RMBS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +75.3% | +74.3% | NVTS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +52.3% | +16.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 4 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RMBS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | RMBS | 31 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | RMBSon balance | revenue growth 22.5% vs 15.1%; EPS growth -5.3% vs 14.5%; TTM ROE -61.5% vs 17.4%; gross margin -1.7% vs 78.3%; operating margin -270.2% vs 35.5% — RMBS takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | RMBS | Value 34 vs 40 |
| Technicals | RMBS | Price vs 50-day -21.5% vs -2.4%; vs 200-day -34.6% vs -14.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 40 vs 42 |
| Analyst expectations | NVTS | Target upside 75.3% vs 74.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NVTS and RMBS 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 wide at 16 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 RMBS.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20RMBS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 16 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- RMBS +16
- 31 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- RMBS +16
- 31 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- RMBS +25
- 36 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- RMBS +13
- 42 vs 55
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.
1 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only NVTS
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
NVTS 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +4.81%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.41%, 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 47 points behind, the largest single contributor to RMBS's edge.
- 2NVTS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3RMBS starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 16-point move would eliminate RMBS'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
RMBS leads on balance| Metric | NVTS | RMBS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 22.5% | 15.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -5.3% | 14.5% |
| Gross margin | -1.7% | 78.3% |
| Operating margin | -270.2% | 35.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -61.5% | 17.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.01 | 0.01 |
Performance
RMBS leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | NVTS | RMBS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -16.4% | -5.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -29.9% | -12.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -31% | -11% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -32.7% | -28.6% |
| Year to date | 22.4% | 0.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -43.5% | -5.8% |
Technicals
RMBS has the stronger structure| Metric | NVTS | RMBS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 26.7 | 34 |
| ADX (14) | 17.8 | 25.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -21.5% | -2.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -34.6% | -14.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 69.6% | 54.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | NVTS | RMBS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.84 | 3.46 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.12 | 0.29 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.23 | 0.41 |
| Max drawdown | -73.8% | -52.9% |
| Current drawdown | -72.5% | -45.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 120.6% | 78% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -10.1% | -7.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NVTS or RMBS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, RMBS is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 47 against NVTS's 31. The edge comes from quality and value. 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 NVTS or RMBS the better buy right now?
RMBS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 RMBS over NVTS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. RMBS leads Quality by 47 points; RMBS leads Value by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NVTS or RMBS?
Analyst price targets imply +75.3% upside for NVTS and +74.3% for RMBS, so the Street currently favors NVTS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors RMBS. 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, NVTS or RMBS?
RMBS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. RMBS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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, NVTS or RMBS?
RMBS 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, NVTS or RMBS?
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, NVTS or RMBS?
RMBS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. RMBS 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 NVTS more profitable than RMBS?
RMBS leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin -1.7% vs 78.3%; operating margin -270.2% vs 35.5%; ttm roe -61.5% vs 17.4%.
Is RMBS's lead over NVTS getting stronger or weaker?
RMBS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 16 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 NVTS vs RMBS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NVTS closes the Quality gap — currently 47 points behind, the largest single contributor to RMBS's edge; NVTS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; RMBS starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 16-point move would eliminate RMBS's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about NVTS and RMBS?
NVTS: 1 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. RMBS: 0 bullish / 3 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 NVTS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On RMBS it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare NVTS and RMBS 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.