REGN vs TEVA Stock Comparison
REGN currently leads TEVA in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 68 vs 56. The clearest difference is quality, while TEVA has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between REGN and TEVA?
REGN leads the current stock comparison as Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. vs Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited
REGN leads
REGN leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from TEVA. Wall Street currently favors TEVA on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support REGN, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors REGN over TEVA, 68 versus 56 as of Oct 21, 2026. REGN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while TEVA holds the stronger value profile. REGN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TEVA. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor REGN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. REGN lead: Reversed — TEVA led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; REGN now leads by 12.
Compare Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited 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 REGN and TEVA 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.
- Quality73 vs 33REGN +40
- Momentum91 vs 72REGN +19
- Value48 vs 65TEVA +17
- Risk Resilience60 vs 55REGN +5
3 of 6 evidence groups favor REGN. REGN’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; TEVA keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +17
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
REGN's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — REGN and TEVA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
REGN (Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
TEVA (Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited): the counter-case, on value, valuation, technicals.
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
REGNREGN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
REGNREGN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TEVATEVA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
REGNREGN on the Momentum factor, by 19 points.
Lower downside
REGNREGN on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
TEVATEVA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors REGN, analyst targets favor TEVA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | REGN | TEVA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +2.7% | +10.8% | TEVA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +47% | +22.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 20 | 6 | 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 REGN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | REGN | 68 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | REGN | revenue growth 19% vs 4%; EPS growth 80.1% vs -253.1%; TTM ROE 13.8% vs 9.2%; gross margin 84.9% vs 52.5%; operating margin 25.6% vs 14.9% |
| Valuation | TEVA | Value 48 vs 65 |
| Technicals | TEVA | Price vs 50-day 1.9% vs 5.6%; vs 200-day 9.8% vs 19.3% |
| Risk Resilience | REGN | Risk Resilience 60 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | TEVA | Target upside 2.7% vs 10.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of REGN and TEVA 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 wide at 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 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 lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 REGN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20REGN lead: Reversed — TEVA led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; REGN now leads by 12.
- Today
- REGN +12
- 68 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- REGN +9
- 65 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- TEVA +6
- 49 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- REGN +12
- 68 vs 56
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Oct 14 when REGN moved ahead of TEVA.
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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish
No signal that the other name lacks.
5 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only TEVA
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.0%)
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
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 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.22%, AIQ +4 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.56%, 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.
- 1TEVA closes the Quality gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to REGN's edge.
- 2TEVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3REGN'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
REGN leads on balance| Metric | REGN | TEVA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 19% | 4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 80.1% | -253.1% |
| Gross margin | 84.9% | 52.5% |
| Operating margin | 25.6% | 14.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.8% | 9.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.06 | 2.16 |
Performance
TEVA leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | REGN | TEVA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 7.2% | -1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.4% | 3.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 24% | 35.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 8% | 30.6% |
| Year to date | 4.6% | 30.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 41.9% | 108.1% |
Technicals
TEVA has the stronger structure| Metric | REGN | TEVA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 64.8 | 61.9 |
| ADX (14) | 18.8 | 32.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.9% | 5.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 9.8% | 19.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 31.2% | 26.7% |
Risk
REGN is the more resilient| Metric | REGN | TEVA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.58 | 0.76 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.05 | 2.01 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.7 | 4.67 |
| Max drawdown | -26.1% | -21.8% |
| Current drawdown | -5.2% | -1.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 33.5% | 39.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.7% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, REGN or TEVA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, REGN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 68 against TEVA's 56. The edge comes from quality and momentum. TEVA is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 REGN or TEVA the better buy right now?
REGN 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 REGN over TEVA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. REGN leads Quality by 40 points; REGN leads Momentum by 19 points; TEVA leads Value by 17 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, REGN or TEVA?
Analyst price targets imply +2.7% upside for REGN and +10.8% for TEVA, so the Street currently favors TEVA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors REGN. 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, REGN or TEVA?
TEVA is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TEVA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 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, REGN or TEVA?
REGN 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, REGN or TEVA?
REGN on the Momentum factor, by 19 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, REGN or TEVA?
REGN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. REGN 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 REGN more profitable than TEVA?
REGN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 84.9% vs 52.5%; operating margin 25.6% vs 14.9%; ttm roe 13.8% vs 9.2%.
Is REGN's lead over TEVA getting stronger or weaker?
REGN lead: Reversed — TEVA led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; REGN now leads by 12. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-10-14, when REGN moved ahead of TEVA.
What would change the REGN vs TEVA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TEVA closes the Quality gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to REGN's edge; TEVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; REGN'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 REGN and TEVA?
REGN: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. TEVA: 5 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on REGN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TEVA it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare REGN and TEVA 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.