SLAB vs TEL Stock Comparison
TEL currently leads SLAB in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 65 vs 53. The clearest difference is value, while SLAB has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between SLAB and TEL?
TEL leads the current stock comparison as TE Connectivity plc, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Silicon Laboratories Inc. vs TE Connectivity plc
TEL leads
TEL leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 9 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support TEL, and its lead is widening.
Silicon Laboratories Inc.
TE Connectivity plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TEL over SLAB, 65 versus 53 as of Oct 21, 2026. TEL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while SLAB holds the stronger risk resilience profile. TEL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TEL today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. TEL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Silicon Laboratories Inc. and TE Connectivity plc 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 SLAB and TEL 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.
- Value29 vs 67TEL +38
- Risk Resilience90 vs 68SLAB +22
- Quality57 vs 63TEL +6
- Momentum56 vs 62TEL +6
4 of 6 evidence groups favor TEL. TEL’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; SLAB keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 +10
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
TEL's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SLAB and TEL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TEL (TE Connectivity plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
SLAB (Silicon Laboratories Inc.): 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
TELTEL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SLABSLAB on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TELTEL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 38 points.
Momentum
TELTEL on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
SLABSLAB on Risk Resilience, by 22 points.
Analyst upside
TELTEL 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 | SLAB | TEL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +4.2% | +16.8% | TEL has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +32% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 7 | 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 TEL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TEL | 53 vs 65 |
| Fundamentals | TELon balance | revenue growth 6.9% vs 8.8%; EPS growth 33.3% vs -12%; TTM ROE -3.6% vs 23.2%; gross margin 59.9% vs 35.4%; operating margin -3.8% vs 19.1% — TEL takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | TEL | Value 29 vs 67 |
| Technicals | SLAB | Price vs 50-day 0.7% vs 1.8%; vs 200-day 6.6% vs 0.1% |
| Risk Resilience | SLAB | Risk Resilience 90 vs 68 |
| Analyst expectations | TEL | Target upside 4.2% vs 16.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SLAB and TEL and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 12 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)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 TEL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TEL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TEL +12
- 53 vs 65
- 7 sessions ago
- TEL +7
- 54 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- TEL +9
- 56 vs 65
- 90 sessions ago
- TEL +5
- 58 vs 63
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 3 when TEL moved ahead of SLAB.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.96%)
- 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
0 bullish / 2 bearish
Only TEL
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.50%)
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bearish Crossover.
SLAB 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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.28%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.2%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1SLAB closes the Value gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to TEL's edge.
- 2SLAB's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3TEL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
TEL leads on balance| Metric | SLAB | TEL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.9% | 8.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 33.3% | -12% |
| Gross margin | 59.9% | 35.4% |
| Operating margin | -3.8% | 19.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -3.6% | 23.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0 | 0.43 |
Performance
SLAB leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SLAB | TEL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0% | -1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.4% | 0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.8% | 6.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.7% | -12.1% |
| Year to date | 69.2% | -6.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 60.5% | -4.7% |
Technicals
SLAB has the stronger structure| Metric | SLAB | TEL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43.5 | 53.9 |
| ADX (14) | 19.1 | 14.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.7% | 1.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.6% | 0.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 3% | 22.6% |
Risk
SLAB is the more resilient| Metric | SLAB | TEL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.35 | 1.6 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.05 | -0.05 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.45 | -0.07 |
| Max drawdown | -15.6% | -21.4% |
| Current drawdown | -0.8% | -14.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 53.3% | 35.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -3.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SLAB or TEL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TEL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 65 against SLAB's 53. The edge comes from value and quality. SLAB 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 SLAB or TEL the better buy right now?
TEL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TEL over SLAB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TEL leads Value by 38 points; SLAB leads Risk Resilience by 22 points; TEL leads Quality by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SLAB or TEL?
Analyst price targets imply +4.2% upside for SLAB and +16.8% for TEL, so the Street currently favors TEL. 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, SLAB or TEL?
TEL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TEL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 38 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, SLAB or TEL?
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 TEL?
TEL on the Momentum factor, by 6 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 TEL?
SLAB is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SLAB on Risk Resilience, by 22 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 TEL?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 59.9% vs 35.4%; operating margin -3.8% vs 19.1%; ttm roe -3.6% vs 23.2%. SLAB leads on one measure and TEL 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 TEL's lead over SLAB getting stronger or weaker?
TEL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 12 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-03, when TEL moved ahead of SLAB.
What would change the SLAB vs TEL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SLAB closes the Value gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to TEL's edge; SLAB's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; TEL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 TEL?
SLAB: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. TEL: 0 bullish / 2 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 SLAB is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TEL it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SLAB and TEL 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.