SLAB vs SMTC Stock Comparison
SLAB currently leads SMTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 53 vs 36. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while SMTC has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between SLAB and SMTC?
SLAB leads the current stock comparison as Silicon Laboratories Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Silicon Laboratories Inc. vs Semtech Corporation
SLAB leads
SLAB leads by 17 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors SMTC on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support SLAB, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Silicon Laboratories Inc.
Semtech Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SLAB over SMTC, 53 versus 36 as of Oct 21, 2026. SLAB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while SMTC holds the stronger quality profile. SLAB also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors SMTC. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SLAB today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. SLAB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 17 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Silicon Laboratories Inc. and Semtech Corporation 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 SLAB and SMTC 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 Resilience90 vs 27SLAB +63
- Momentum56 vs 15SLAB +41
- Quality57 vs 68SMTC +11
- Value29 vs 26Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor SLAB. SLAB’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; SMTC keeps a meaningful quality 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 -3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
SLAB's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SLAB and SMTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SLAB (Silicon Laboratories Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
SMTC (Semtech Corporation): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 75.1% against 3%.
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
SLABSLAB on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SLABSLAB on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
SLABSLAB on the Momentum factor, by 41 points.
Lower downside
SLABSLAB on Risk Resilience, by 63 points.
Analyst upside
SMTCSMTC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SLAB, analyst targets favor SMTC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | SLAB | SMTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +4.2% | +42.1% | SMTC has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +74.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 17 | 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 SLAB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SLAB | 53 vs 36 |
| Fundamentals | SMTCon balance | revenue growth 6.9% vs 17.5%; EPS growth 33.3% vs 4.9%; TTM ROE -3.6% vs 25.3%; gross margin 59.9% vs 52%; operating margin -3.8% vs 12.7% — SMTC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 29 vs 26 |
| Technicals | SLAB | Price vs 50-day 0.7% vs -9.8%; vs 200-day 6.6% vs 11.2% |
| Risk Resilience | SLAB | Risk Resilience 90 vs 27 |
| Analyst expectations | SMTC | Target upside 4.2% vs 42.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SLAB and SMTC 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 17 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 SLAB.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SLAB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 17 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SLAB +17
- 53 vs 36
- 7 sessions ago
- SLAB +18
- 54 vs 36
- 30 sessions ago
- SLAB +6
- 56 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- SLAB +11
- 58 vs 47
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SLAB
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.43%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.9%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SMTC
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (9.43%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
SLAB 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.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.28%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +3.99%, 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.
- 1SMTC closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 63 points behind, the largest single contributor to SLAB's edge.
- 2SMTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3SLAB's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 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
SMTC leads on balance| Metric | SLAB | SMTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.9% | 17.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 33.3% | 4.9% |
| Gross margin | 59.9% | 52% |
| Operating margin | -3.8% | 12.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -3.6% | 25.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0 | 0.7 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | SLAB | SMTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0% | -21.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.4% | -21.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.8% | -0.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.7% | 31.6% |
| Year to date | 69.2% | 84.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 60.5% | 98% |
Technicals
SLAB has the stronger structure| Metric | SLAB | SMTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43.5 | 29.8 |
| ADX (14) | 19.1 | 22.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.7% | -9.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.6% | 11.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 3% | 75.1% |
Risk
SLAB is the more resilient| Metric | SLAB | SMTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.35 | 3.11 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.05 | 1.24 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.45 | 1.98 |
| Max drawdown | -15.6% | -40.7% |
| Current drawdown | -0.8% | -30.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 53.3% | 78.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SLAB or SMTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SLAB is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 53 against SMTC's 36. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. SMTC 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 SLAB or SMTC the better buy right now?
SLAB carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 SLAB over SMTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SLAB leads Risk Resilience by 63 points; SLAB leads Momentum by 41 points; SMTC leads Quality by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SLAB or SMTC?
Analyst price targets imply +4.2% upside for SLAB and +42.1% for SMTC, so the Street currently favors SMTC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SLAB. 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, SLAB or SMTC?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, SLAB or SMTC?
SLAB 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, SLAB or SMTC?
SLAB on the Momentum factor, by 41 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, SLAB or SMTC?
SLAB is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SLAB on Risk Resilience, by 63 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 SLAB more profitable than SMTC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 59.9% vs 52%; operating margin -3.8% vs 12.7%; ttm roe -3.6% vs 25.3%. SLAB leads on one measure and SMTC 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 SLAB's lead over SMTC getting stronger or weaker?
SLAB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 17 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the SLAB vs SMTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SMTC closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 63 points behind, the largest single contributor to SLAB's edge; SMTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; SLAB's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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 SLAB and SMTC?
SLAB: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. SMTC: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 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 SLAB is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SMTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare SLAB and SMTC 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.