SPY vs QCOM Stock Comparison
QCOM currently leads SPY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 71 vs 65. The clearest difference is value, while SPY has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between SPY and QCOM?
QCOM leads the current stock comparison as QUALCOMM Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF vs QUALCOMM Incorporated
QCOM leads
QCOM leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from SPY.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support QCOM, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
QUALCOMM Incorporated
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors QCOM over SPY, 71 versus 65 as of Oct 31, 2026. QCOM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while SPY holds the stronger risk resilience profile. QCOM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor QCOM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. QCOM lead: Reversed — SPY led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; QCOM now leads by 6.
Compare State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF and QUALCOMM Incorporated across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare SPY and QCOM 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.
- Risk Resilience87 vs 51SPY +36
- Value41 vs 69QCOM +28
- Momentum59 vs 70QCOM +11
- Quality84 vs 83Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor QCOM. QCOM’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; SPY keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
QCOM's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SPY and QCOM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
QCOM (QUALCOMM Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
SPY (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF): 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
QCOMQCOM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
QCOMQCOM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 points.
Momentum
QCOMQCOM on the Momentum factor, by 11 points.
Lower downside
SPYSPY on Risk Resilience, by 36 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | SPY | QCOM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | — | +30.7% | Level |
| Target dispersion | — | +111.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | — | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | — | 18 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 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 | 65 vs 71 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | QCOM | Value 41 vs 69 |
| Technicals | SPY | Price vs 50-day -1.6% vs -7%; vs 200-day 6.1% vs 8% |
| Risk Resilience | SPY | Risk Resilience 87 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SPY and QCOM 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 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 · Jun 29 – Oct 28QCOM lead: Reversed — SPY led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; QCOM now leads by 6.
- Today
- QCOM +6
- 65 vs 71
- 7 sessions ago
- QCOM +4
- 59 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +6
- 70 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- QCOM +3
- 62 vs 65
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 2 when SPY moved ahead of QCOM.
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 / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SPY
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.90%)
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.1%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only QCOM
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Compression, Uptrend Structure Active.
SPY 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.77%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -11.12%, 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.
- 1SPY closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to QCOM's edge.
- 2SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish.
- 3QCOM's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
Split| Metric | SPY | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | — | -6.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | — | -72.7% |
| Gross margin | — | 54.2% |
| Operating margin | — | 23.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | — | 37.3% |
| Debt to equity | — | 0.55 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | SPY | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.1% | 2.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.3% | -0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.1% | 20.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 8.5% | 17.3% |
| Year to date | 13.3% | 7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 14% | 8.3% |
Technicals
SPY has the stronger structure| Metric | SPY | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.6 | 57.9 |
| ADX (14) | 14 | 10.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.6% | -7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.1% | 8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 10% | 30.9% |
Risk
SPY is the more resilient| Metric | SPY | QCOM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1 | 2.06 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.68 | 0.21 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.04 | 0.31 |
| Max drawdown | -9.1% | -41.2% |
| Current drawdown | -0.9% | -27.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 12.7% | 53% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.4% | -4.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SPY or QCOM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, QCOM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 71 against SPY's 65. The edge comes from value and momentum. SPY 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 SPY or QCOM the better buy right now?
QCOM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor QCOM over SPY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SPY leads Risk Resilience by 36 points; QCOM leads Value by 28 points; QCOM leads Momentum by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SPY or QCOM?
Analyst price targets imply not covered upside for SPY and +30.7% for 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, SPY or QCOM?
QCOM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. QCOM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 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, SPY or QCOM?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, SPY or QCOM?
QCOM on the Momentum factor, by 11 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, SPY or QCOM?
SPY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPY on Risk Resilience, by 36 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 SPY more profitable than QCOM?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is QCOM's lead over SPY getting stronger or weaker?
QCOM lead: Reversed — SPY led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; QCOM now leads by 6. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-02, when SPY moved ahead of QCOM.
What would change the SPY vs QCOM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SPY closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to QCOM's edge; SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish; QCOM's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 SPY and QCOM?
SPY: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. QCOM: 3 bullish / 0 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 SPY is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On QCOM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
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.