QQQ vs XNCR Stock Comparison

Compare QQQ and XNCR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.

Market data as of Sep 11, 2026 market close· AIQ score gap 11 points
QQQ
Equity
vs
XNCR
Healthcare
QQQ
Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Leads
Price
$715
Day move
+0.87%
AIQ Score
56/100
Best edge
Quality
Sector
Equity
XNCR
Xencor, Inc.
Price
$24.41
Day move
+0.62%
AIQ Score
45/100
Best edge
Momentum
Sector
Healthcare

What is the main difference between QQQ and XNCR?

QQQ leads the current stock comparison as Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 vs Xencor, Inc.

Data as of Sep 11, 2026· market close· XNCR (stock) vs QQQ (ETF)· Coverage 66/66 fields· 42/42 directly comparable· Moderate confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 5/10

QQQ leads

QQQ leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.

Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support QQQ, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 4Comparison trend: Stable
QQQ

Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1

Leads
AIQ Score
56/100
AIQ Edge Score
8/10
XNCR

Xencor, Inc.

AIQ Score
45/100
AIQ Edge Score
4/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors QQQ over XNCR, 56 versus 45 as of Sep 11, 2026. QQQ's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while XNCR holds the stronger momentum profile. QQQ also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor QQQ today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. QQQ lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.

Compare Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 and Xencor, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Price-return comparison using available daily close history.

QQQ
+88.3%
XNCR
-27.0%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000

QQQ $18,832 · XNCR $7,301

Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.

Compare QQQ and XNCR against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

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.

QQQ advantage
0
XNCR advantage
  • Quality83 vs 48
    QQQ +35
  • Risk Resilience75 vs 55
    QQQ +20
  • Momentum45 vs 50
    XNCR +5
  • Value30 vs 34
    XNCR +4

2 of 4 evidence groups favor QQQ. QQQ’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; XNCR keeps a meaningful momentum edge.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.

QQQ-5 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -17

No new signals fired.

XNCR-1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -1

New signals

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze neutral, volatility, short horizon

QQQ's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — QQQ and XNCR both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

QQQ (Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.

XNCR (Xencor, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 71.1% against 13%.

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

QQQ

QQQ on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.

Growth

Even

Growth figures are not covered for both names.

Value

XNCR

XNCR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.

Momentum

XNCR

XNCR on the Momentum factor, by 5 points.

Lower downside

QQQ

QQQ on Risk Resilience, by 20 points.

Analyst upside

Even

Analyst 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.

MeasureQQQXNCRNote
Implied upside to target+40.3%Level
Target dispersion+75.9%Lower is tighter analyst agreement
ConsensusBuyContext, not a primary driver
Analysts covering4Higher 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 QQQ. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreQQQ56 vs 45
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationXNCRValue 30 vs 34
TechnicalsXNCRPrice vs 50-day 0.6% vs 12.9%; vs 200-day 7.5% vs 58.8%
Risk ResilienceQQQRisk Resilience 75 vs 55
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of QQQ and XNCR and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.

  • The AIQ gap is moderate at 11 points.
  • Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • 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 QQQ.

How the comparison changed

119 daily snapshots · May 4 Sep 10

QQQ lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.

May 4QQQ leads above the line · XNCR leads belowSep 10
Today
QQQ +11
56 vs 45
7 sessions ago
QQQ +9
59 vs 50
30 sessions ago
QQQ +11
64 vs 53
90 sessions ago
XNCR +3
50 vs 53

The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 3 when QQQ moved ahead of XNCR.

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.

QQQConflicted

2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

  • Golden Cross Active bullish, trend, long horizon (7.75%)
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • ATR Contraction - Coiling neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.27%)
XNCRConflicted

3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

  • Golden Cross Active bullish, trend, long horizon (41.52%)
  • Bollinger Band Squeeze neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish bullish, trend, medium horizon

QQQ 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.

QQQDivergence

Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 5 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.87%, AIQ -5 points).

XNCRDivergence

Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.62%, 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.

  1. 1XNCR closes the Quality gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to QQQ's edge.
  2. 2XNCR's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
  3. 3QQQ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
  4. 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
MetricQQQXNCR
Revenue growth (YoY)10.3%
EPS growth (YoY)83%
Gross margin43.3%
Operating margin-205.8%
Return on equity (TTM)-28.7%
Debt to equity0.13

Performance

XNCR leads 5 of 6 windows
MetricQQQXNCR
1 week (5 sessions)-0.1%-9.8%
1 month (20 sessions)-2.1%4.7%
3 months (63 sessions)2.2%105.1%
6 months (126 sessions)16.6%101.5%
Year to date15.4%58.5%
1 year (252 sessions)22.4%188.5%

Technicals

XNCR has the stronger structure
MetricQQQXNCR
RSI (14)48.138.5
ADX (14)9.852
Price vs 50-day0.6%12.9%
Price vs 200-day7.5%58.8%
Volatility (1M, annualized)13%71.1%

Risk

QQQ is the more resilient
MetricQQQXNCR
Beta1.421.24
Sharpe ratio0.921.88
Sortino ratio1.383.32
Max drawdown-12.2%-42.6%
Current drawdown-5%-17.2%
Annualized volatility19.7%67.2%
Value at risk (95%)-1.9%-5.7%

Straight answers

Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.

Which is better, QQQ or XNCR?

On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, QQQ is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 56 against XNCR's 45. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. XNCR 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 QQQ or XNCR the better buy right now?

QQQ carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 QQQ over XNCR?

The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. QQQ leads Quality by 35 points; QQQ leads Risk Resilience by 20 points; XNCR leads Momentum by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.

Which has more analyst upside, QQQ or XNCR?

Analyst price targets imply not covered upside for QQQ and +40.3% for XNCR. 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, QQQ or XNCR?

XNCR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. XNCR 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, QQQ or XNCR?

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, QQQ or XNCR?

XNCR on the Momentum factor, by 5 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, QQQ or XNCR?

QQQ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. QQQ on Risk Resilience, by 20 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 QQQ more profitable than XNCR?

Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.

Is QQQ's lead over XNCR getting stronger or weaker?

QQQ lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 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 2026-08-03, when QQQ moved ahead of XNCR.

What would change the QQQ vs XNCR verdict?

The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: XNCR closes the Quality gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to QQQ's edge; XNCR's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; QQQ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 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 QQQ and XNCR?

QQQ: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. XNCR: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 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 QQQ is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On XNCR 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.