POWI vs RMBS Stock Comparison
Compare POWI and RMBS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between POWI 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
Power Integrations, Inc. vs Rambus Inc.
RMBS leads
RMBS leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support RMBS, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Power Integrations, Inc.
Rambus Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors RMBS over POWI, 50 versus 44 as of Sep 11, 2026. RMBS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while POWI holds the stronger risk resilience profile. RMBS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RMBS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. RMBS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Power Integrations, Inc. and Rambus Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare POWI 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.
- Quality58 vs 77RMBS +19
- Risk Resilience53 vs 45POWI +8
- Momentum25 vs 31RMBS +6
- Value43 vs 40Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor RMBS. RMBS’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; POWI keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No new signals fired.
RMBS's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — POWI and RMBS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
RMBS (Rambus Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
POWI (Power Integrations, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
RMBSRMBS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
POWIPOWI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
RMBSRMBS on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
POWIPOWI on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
RMBSRMBS 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 | POWI | RMBS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +62.6% | +86% | RMBS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +11.8% | +16.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 4 | 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 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 | 44 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | RMBSon balance | revenue growth 9.8% vs 15.1%; EPS growth 203% vs 14.5%; TTM ROE 3.7% vs 17.4%; gross margin 53.6% vs 78.3%; operating margin 7.9% vs 35.5% — RMBS takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 43 vs 40 |
| Technicals | POWI | Price vs 50-day -15.4% vs -10.2%; vs 200-day -12% vs -20.9% |
| Risk Resilience | POWI | Risk Resilience 53 vs 45 |
| Analyst expectations | RMBS | Target upside 62.6% vs 86% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of POWI and RMBS 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 lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10RMBS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- RMBS +6
- 44 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- RMBS +4
- 44 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- RMBS +7
- 45 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- RMBS +2
- 42 vs 44
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Jul 2 when RMBS moved ahead of POWI.
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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (9.10%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.49%)
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.42%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.33%)
RMBS 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 +5.21%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.9%, AIQ -1 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.
- 1POWI closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to RMBS's edge.
- 2POWI's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3RMBS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 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
RMBS leads on balance| Metric | POWI | RMBS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 9.8% | 15.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 203% | 14.5% |
| Gross margin | 53.6% | 78.3% |
| Operating margin | 7.9% | 35.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 3.7% | 17.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0 | 0.01 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | POWI | RMBS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.2% | 0.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -22.2% | -15.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -33.4% | -38.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.1% | -7.8% |
| Year to date | 39.8% | -7.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 10.4% | 16.5% |
Technicals
POWI has the stronger structure| Metric | POWI | RMBS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 27.9 | 35.8 |
| ADX (14) | 34.5 | 29.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -15.4% | -10.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12% | -20.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 39.5% | 43% |
Risk
POWI is the more resilient| Metric | POWI | RMBS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.35 | 3.51 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.41 | 0.52 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.68 | 0.74 |
| Max drawdown | -43.1% | -51.5% |
| Current drawdown | -43.1% | -50% |
| Annualized volatility | 63.2% | 79.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.5% | -7.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, POWI or RMBS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, RMBS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 50 against POWI's 44. The edge comes from quality and momentum. POWI 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 POWI or RMBS the better buy right now?
RMBS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 RMBS over POWI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. RMBS leads Quality by 19 points; POWI leads Risk Resilience by 8 points; RMBS leads Momentum by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, POWI or RMBS?
Analyst price targets imply +62.6% upside for POWI and +86% for RMBS, so the Street currently favors RMBS. 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, POWI or RMBS?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, POWI or RMBS?
POWI 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, POWI or RMBS?
RMBS on the Momentum factor, by 6 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, POWI or RMBS?
POWI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. POWI on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 POWI more profitable than RMBS?
RMBS leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 53.6% vs 78.3%; operating margin 7.9% vs 35.5%; ttm roe 3.7% vs 17.4%.
Is RMBS's lead over POWI getting stronger or weaker?
RMBS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-02, when RMBS moved ahead of POWI.
What would change the POWI vs RMBS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: POWI closes the Quality gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to RMBS's edge; POWI's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; RMBS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; 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.
What do the current signals say about POWI and RMBS?
POWI: 3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. RMBS: 1 bullish / 2 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 POWI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On RMBS it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare POWI 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.