ONTO vs SITM Stock Comparison
Onto Innovation Inc. vs SiTime Corporation
ONTO leads
ONTO leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 5 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support ONTO, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Onto Innovation Inc.
SiTime Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ONTO over SITM, 33 versus 31 as of Sep 5, 2026. ONTO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while SITM holds the stronger momentum profile. ONTO also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ONTO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. ONTO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Onto Innovation Inc. and SiTime Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare ONTO and SITM 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.
- Momentum25%15 vs 31SITM +16
- Risk Resilience15%40 vs 29ONTO +11
- Quality30%48 vs 38ONTO +10
- Value30%28 vs 24ONTO +4
4 of 6 evidence groups favor ONTO. ONTO’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; SITM keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +16
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
ONTO's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ONTO and SITM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ONTO (Onto Innovation Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
SITM (SiTime Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals.
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
ONTOONTO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
ONTOONTO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ONTOONTO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
SITMSITM on the Momentum factor, by 16 points.
Lower downside
ONTOONTO on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
ONTOONTO 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 | ONTO | SITM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +38.8% | +32.8% | ONTO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +36.3% | +49.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 6 | 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 ONTO. 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 | 33 vs 31 |
| Fundamentals | ONTOon balance | revenue growth 17.5% vs 38.6%; EPS growth 79.4% vs 4.4%; TTM ROE 6.5% vs 1.3%; gross margin 50.4% vs 58.7%; operating margin 12.5% vs -1.7% — ONTO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ONTO | Value 28 vs 24 |
| Technicals | SITM | Price vs 50-day -8.8% vs 0.4%; vs 200-day 11.2% vs 22.4% |
| Risk Resilience | ONTO | Risk Resilience 40 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | ONTO | Target upside 38.8% vs 32.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ONTO and SITM 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 2 points. (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)
- 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 ONTO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4ONTO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ONTO +2
- 33 vs 31
- 7 sessions ago
- ONTO +9
- 36 vs 27
- 30 sessions ago
- ONTO +5
- 50 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- ONTO +12
- 50 vs 38
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 11 when ONTO moved ahead of SITM.
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 (21.96%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.10%)
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (21.95%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
ONTO 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +6.16%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +6.55%, AIQ +4 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.
- 1SITM closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to ONTO's edge.
- 2SITM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish.
- 3ONTO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate ONTO'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
ONTO leads on balance| Metric | ONTO | SITM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 17.5% | 38.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 79.4% | 4.4% |
| Gross margin | 50.4% | 58.7% |
| Operating margin | 12.5% | -1.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 6.5% | 1.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.77 | 1.29 |
Performance
SITM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ONTO | SITM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1% | 9.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.1% | -15.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.8% | -2.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 49.1% | 87% |
| Year to date | 69.8% | 73.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 161.1% | 172.7% |
Technicals
SITM has the stronger structure| Metric | ONTO | SITM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 21.1 | 29.9 |
| ADX (14) | 14.8 | 14.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -8.8% | 0.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 11.2% | 22.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 77.6% | 72.6% |
Risk
ONTO is the more resilient| Metric | ONTO | SITM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.14 | 2.83 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.67 | 1.51 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.7 | 2.79 |
| Max drawdown | -42.3% | -48.7% |
| Current drawdown | -29.2% | -32.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 70.9% | 85.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.2% | -7.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ONTO or SITM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ONTO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 33 against SITM's 31. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. SITM is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 ONTO or SITM the better buy right now?
ONTO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ONTO over SITM?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. SITM leads Momentum by 16 points; ONTO leads Risk Resilience by 11 points; ONTO leads Quality by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ONTO or SITM?
Analyst price targets imply +38.8% upside for ONTO and +32.8% for SITM, so the Street currently favors ONTO. 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, ONTO or SITM?
ONTO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ONTO 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, ONTO or SITM?
ONTO 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, ONTO or SITM?
SITM on the Momentum factor, by 16 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, ONTO or SITM?
ONTO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ONTO on Risk Resilience, by 11 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ONTO more profitable than SITM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 50.4% vs 58.7%; operating margin 12.5% vs -1.7%; ttm roe 6.5% vs 1.3%. ONTO leads on two measures and SITM 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 ONTO's lead over SITM getting stronger or weaker?
ONTO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-11, when ONTO moved ahead of SITM.
What would change the ONTO vs SITM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SITM closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to ONTO's edge; SITM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish; ONTO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate ONTO's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ONTO and SITM?
ONTO: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. SITM: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 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 ONTO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SITM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ONTO and SITM 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.