QCOM vs NXPI Stock Comparison
QUALCOMM Incorporated vs NXP Semiconductors N.V.
QCOM leads
QCOM leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 11 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support QCOM, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
QUALCOMM Incorporated
NXP Semiconductors N.V.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors QCOM over NXPI, 69 versus 55 as of Sep 2, 2026. QCOM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality. QCOM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor QCOM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. QCOM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare QUALCOMM Incorporated and NXP Semiconductors N.V. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
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%66 vs 32QCOM +34
- Quality30%83 vs 69QCOM +14
- Value30%69 vs 65QCOM +4
- Risk Resilience15%47 vs 45Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor QCOM. QCOM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-01, compared against the prior scored session 2026-08-31.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
QCOM's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — QCOM and NXPI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
QCOM (QUALCOMM Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
NXPI (NXP Semiconductors N.V.): the counter-case, on fundamentals.
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
QCOMQCOM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
NXPINXPI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
QCOMQCOM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
QCOMQCOM on the Momentum factor, by 34 points.
Lower downside
NXPINXPI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
QCOMQCOM 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 | QCOM | NXPI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20% | +18.3% | QCOM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +137.9% | +55.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 20 | 8 | 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 QCOM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | QCOM | 69 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | NXPIon balance | revenue growth -6.2% vs 9.9%; EPS growth -72.7% vs -31.5%; ROE 37.3% vs 28%; gross margin 54.2% vs 55.9%; operating margin 23.2% vs 28.7% — NXPI takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | QCOM | Value 69 vs 65 |
| Technicals | QCOM | Price vs 50-day -1.8% vs -10.9%; vs 200-day 1.5% vs -7.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 47 vs 45 |
| Analyst expectations | QCOM | Target upside 20% vs 18.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of QCOM and NXPI 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 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 QCOM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 20 – Sep 1QCOM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- QCOM +14
- 69 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- QCOM +9
- 63 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- QCOM +11
- 61 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- QCOM +6
- 58 vs 52
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Apr 24 when QCOM moved ahead of NXPI.
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 (2.67%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.62%)
2 bullish / 0 bearish
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.50%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
QCOM 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 +1.59%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.72%, 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.
- 1NXPI closes the Momentum gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to QCOM's edge.
- 2NXPI generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3QCOM'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
NXPI leads on balance| Metric | QCOM | NXPI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -6.2% | 9.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -72.7% | -31.5% |
| Gross margin | 54.2% | 55.9% |
| Operating margin | 23.2% | 28.7% |
| Return on equity | 37.3% | 28% |
| Debt to equity | 0.55 | 0.96 |
Technicals
QCOM has the stronger structure| Metric | QCOM | NXPI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 64.5 | 33.1 |
| ADX (14) | 12.1 | 33 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.8% | -10.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.5% | -7.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 40.7% | 32.9% |
Risk
Split| Metric | QCOM | NXPI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.04 | 1.74 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.29 | 0.02 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.43 | 0.05 |
| Max drawdown | -41.2% | -33.1% |
| Current drawdown | -32.1% | -32.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 51.6% | 48.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.6% | -4.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, QCOM or NXPI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, QCOM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 2, 2026, scoring 69 against NXPI's 55. The edge comes from momentum and quality. 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 QCOM or NXPI the better buy right now?
QCOM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 2, 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 QCOM over NXPI?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. QCOM leads Momentum by 34 points; QCOM leads Quality by 14 points; QCOM leads Value by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, QCOM or NXPI?
Analyst price targets imply +20% upside for QCOM and +18.3% for NXPI, so the Street currently favors QCOM. 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, QCOM or NXPI?
QCOM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. QCOM 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, QCOM or NXPI?
NXPI 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, QCOM or NXPI?
QCOM on the Momentum factor, by 34 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, QCOM or NXPI?
NXPI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NXPI 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 QCOM more profitable than NXPI?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 54.2% vs 55.9%; operating margin 23.2% vs 28.7%; roe 37.3% vs 28%. QCOM leads on one measure and NXPI on two measures, 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 QCOM's lead over NXPI getting stronger or weaker?
QCOM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-20 and 2026-09-01. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-04-24, when QCOM moved ahead of NXPI.
What would change the QCOM vs NXPI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NXPI closes the Momentum gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to QCOM's edge; NXPI generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; QCOM'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 QCOM and NXPI?
QCOM: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. NXPI: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. 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 QCOM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NXPI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare QCOM and NXPI 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.