SMTC vs TSEM Stock Comparison
Semtech Corporation vs Tower Semiconductor Ltd.
SMTC leads
SMTC leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from TSEM. Wall Street currently favors TSEM on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support SMTC, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Semtech Corporation
Tower Semiconductor Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SMTC over TSEM, 48 versus 39 as of Sep 5, 2026. SMTC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while TSEM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. SMTC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TSEM. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SMTC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. SMTC lead: Reversed — TSEM led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SMTC now leads by 9.
Compare Semtech Corporation and Tower Semiconductor Ltd. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare SMTC and TSEM 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.
- Momentum25%63 vs 29SMTC +34
- Risk Resilience15%27 vs 57TSEM +30
- Quality30%68 vs 51SMTC +17
- Value30%26 vs 25Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor SMTC. SMTC’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; TSEM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No new signals fired.
SMTC's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SMTC and TSEM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SMTC (Semtech Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
TSEM (Tower Semiconductor Ltd.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, analyst expectations.
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
SMTCSMTC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
TSEMTSEM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
SMTCSMTC on the Momentum factor, by 34 points.
Lower downside
TSEMTSEM on Risk Resilience, by 30 points.
Analyst upside
TSEMTSEM on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SMTC, analyst targets favor TSEM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | SMTC | TSEM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +26.7% | +41.7% | TSEM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +106.7% | +9.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 14 | 2 | 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 SMTC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SMTC | 48 vs 39 |
| Fundamentals | SMTCon balance | revenue growth 17.5% vs 11.2%; EPS growth 4.9% vs 40.4%; TTM ROE 25.3% vs 9.8%; gross margin 52% vs 26.9%; operating margin 12.7% vs 16.2% — SMTC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 26 vs 25 |
| Technicals | SMTC | Price vs 50-day 11.3% vs -3.6%; vs 200-day 37.6% vs 19.4% |
| Risk Resilience | TSEM | Risk Resilience 27 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | TSEM | Target upside 26.7% vs 41.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SMTC and TSEM 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 9 points.
- 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)
- 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 SMTC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4SMTC lead: Reversed — TSEM led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SMTC now leads by 9.
- Today
- SMTC +9
- 48 vs 39
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 37 vs 37
- 30 sessions ago
- TSEM +12
- 40 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- TSEM +3
- 37 vs 40
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 26 when SMTC moved ahead of TSEM.
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 / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (23.64%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (23.95%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.05%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
TSEM 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +9.22%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +7.85%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1TSEM closes the Momentum gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to SMTC's edge.
- 2TSEM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3SMTC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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 | SMTC | TSEM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 17.5% | 11.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 4.9% | 40.4% |
| Gross margin | 52% | 26.9% |
| Operating margin | 12.7% | 16.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 25.3% | 9.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.7 | 0.05 |
Performance
SMTC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SMTC | TSEM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 12.7% | 6.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 6.1% | -11.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2.1% | -5.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 80.3% | 101% |
| Year to date | 100.7% | 89.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 155.3% | 257.1% |
Technicals
SMTC has the stronger structure| Metric | SMTC | TSEM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 46.2 | 31.1 |
| ADX (14) | 9.3 | 14.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 11.3% | -3.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 37.6% | 19.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 97.9% | 65.1% |
Risk
TSEM is the more resilient| Metric | SMTC | TSEM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.07 | 2.92 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.54 | 1.94 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.47 | 3.24 |
| Max drawdown | -40.7% | -40.7% |
| Current drawdown | -15.4% | -29.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 74.6% | 79% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.5% | -7.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SMTC or TSEM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SMTC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 48 against TSEM's 39. The edge comes from momentum and quality. TSEM 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 SMTC or TSEM the better buy right now?
SMTC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 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 SMTC over TSEM?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. SMTC leads Momentum by 34 points; TSEM leads Risk Resilience by 30 points; SMTC leads Quality by 17 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SMTC or TSEM?
Analyst price targets imply +26.7% upside for SMTC and +41.7% for TSEM, so the Street currently favors TSEM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SMTC. 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, SMTC or TSEM?
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, SMTC or TSEM?
TSEM 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, SMTC or TSEM?
SMTC on the Momentum factor, by 34 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, SMTC or TSEM?
TSEM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSEM on Risk Resilience, by 30 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is SMTC more profitable than TSEM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 52% vs 26.9%; operating margin 12.7% vs 16.2%; ttm roe 25.3% vs 9.8%. SMTC leads on two measures and TSEM on one measure, 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 SMTC's lead over TSEM getting stronger or weaker?
SMTC lead: Reversed — TSEM led by 12 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SMTC now leads by 9. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-26, when SMTC moved ahead of TSEM.
What would change the SMTC vs TSEM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TSEM closes the Momentum gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to SMTC's edge; TSEM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; SMTC's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about SMTC and TSEM?
SMTC: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. TSEM: 1 bullish / 1 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 SMTC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TSEM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare SMTC and TSEM with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.