TSM vs PYPL Stock Comparison
PYPL currently leads TSM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 67 vs 58. The clearest difference is momentum, while TSM has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between TSM and PYPL?
PYPL leads the current stock comparison as PayPal Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited vs PayPal Holdings, Inc.
PYPL leads
PYPL leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value. Wall Street currently favors TSM on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support PYPL.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
PayPal Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PYPL over TSM, 67 versus 58 as of Oct 21, 2026. PYPL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while TSM holds the stronger quality profile. PYPL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TSM. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PYPL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree.
Compare Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited and PayPal Holdings, 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 TSM and PYPL 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.
- Momentum21 vs 80PYPL +59
- Quality98 vs 64TSM +34
- Value45 vs 63PYPL +18
- Risk Resilience67 vs 62TSM +5
3 of 6 evidence groups favor PYPL. PYPL’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; TSM keeps a meaningful quality edge.
The central trade-off
PYPL (PayPal Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
TSM (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
PYPLPYPL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TSMTSM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PYPLPYPL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 points.
Momentum
PYPLPYPL on the Momentum factor, by 59 points.
Lower downside
TSMTSM on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
TSMTSM on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors PYPL, analyst targets favor TSM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TSM | PYPL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +36.4% | -5.6% | TSM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +34% | +51.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 16 | 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 PYPL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PYPL | 58 vs 67 |
| Fundamentals | TSM | revenue growth 17.6% vs 3.9%; EPS growth 8% vs 3.3%; TTM ROE 41.2% vs 24.4%; gross margin 65.8% vs 45.8%; operating margin 57.9% vs 18.8% |
| Valuation | PYPL | Value 45 vs 63 |
| Technicals | PYPL | Price vs 50-day -0.6% vs 2.2%; vs 200-day 7.3% vs 14.2% |
| Risk Resilience | TSM | Risk Resilience 67 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | TSM | Target upside 36.4% vs -5.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TSM and PYPL 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 9 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 PYPL.
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.
- 1TSM closes the Momentum gap — currently 59 points behind, the largest single contributor to PYPL's edge.
- 2TSM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3PYPL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
TSM leads on balance| Metric | TSM | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 17.6% | 3.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 8% | 3.3% |
| Gross margin | 65.8% | 45.8% |
| Operating margin | 57.9% | 18.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 41.2% | 24.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.14 | 0.72 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | TSM | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.5% | 1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6% | 8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.9% | 2.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 15.5% | 12.3% |
| Year to date | 39.9% | -2.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 41.8% | -13.5% |
Technicals
PYPL has the stronger structure| Metric | TSM | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.7 | 85 |
| ADX (14) | 21.6 | 23.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.6% | 2.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7.3% | 14.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.8% | 24.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TSM or PYPL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PYPL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 67 against TSM's 58. The edge comes from momentum and value. TSM is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 TSM or PYPL the better buy right now?
PYPL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 PYPL over TSM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PYPL leads Momentum by 59 points; TSM leads Quality by 34 points; PYPL leads Value by 18 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TSM or PYPL?
Analyst price targets imply +36.4% upside for TSM and -5.6% for PYPL, so the Street currently favors TSM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PYPL. 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, TSM or PYPL?
PYPL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PYPL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 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, TSM or PYPL?
TSM 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, TSM or PYPL?
PYPL on the Momentum factor, by 59 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, TSM or PYPL?
TSM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSM on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 TSM more profitable than PYPL?
TSM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 65.8% vs 45.8%; operating margin 57.9% vs 18.8%; ttm roe 41.2% vs 24.4%.
What would change the TSM vs PYPL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TSM closes the Momentum gap — currently 59 points behind, the largest single contributor to PYPL's edge; TSM generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; PYPL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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.
Compare TSM and PYPL 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.