SNDK vs TSEM Stock Comparison
Compare SNDK and TSEM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between SNDK and TSEM?
SNDK leads the current stock comparison as Sandisk Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Sandisk Corporation vs Tower Semiconductor Ltd.
SNDK leads
SNDK leads by 31 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 18 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors TSEM on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support SNDK, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Sandisk Corporation
Tower Semiconductor Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SNDK over TSEM, 70 versus 39 as of Sep 6, 2026. SNDK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while TSEM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. SNDK also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TSEM. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SNDK today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. SNDK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 31 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Sandisk Corporation and Tower Semiconductor Ltd. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare SNDK 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.
- Quality30%100 vs 51SNDK +49
- Momentum25%76 vs 29SNDK +47
- Value30%50 vs 25SNDK +25
- Risk Resilience15%38 vs 57TSEM +19
4 of 6 evidence groups favor SNDK. SNDK’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; TSEM keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
SNDK's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SNDK and TSEM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SNDK (Sandisk Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
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
SNDKSNDK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
SNDKSNDK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SNDKSNDK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 points.
Momentum
SNDKSNDK on the Momentum factor, by 47 points.
Lower downside
TSEMTSEM on Risk Resilience, by 19 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 SNDK, analyst targets favor TSEM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | SNDK | TSEM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +7.1% | +34.9% | TSEM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +122% | +20% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 3 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SNDK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SNDK | 70 vs 39 |
| Fundamentals | SNDK | revenue growth 50.7% vs 11.2%; EPS growth 92.9% vs 40.4%; TTM ROE 93.1% vs 9.8%; gross margin 71.5% vs 26.9%; operating margin 61.2% vs 16.2% |
| Valuation | SNDK | Value 50 vs 25 |
| Technicals | SNDK | Price vs 50-day 12.2% vs -3.6%; vs 200-day 73.3% vs 19.4% |
| Risk Resilience | TSEM | Risk Resilience 38 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | TSEM | Target upside 7.1% vs 34.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SNDK and TSEM 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 31 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 SNDK.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5SNDK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 31 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SNDK +31
- 70 vs 39
- 7 sessions ago
- SNDK +35
- 71 vs 36
- 30 sessions ago
- SNDK +18
- 71 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- SNDK +26
- 63 vs 37
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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (54.41%)
- 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 +11.9%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +7.85%, 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.
- 1TSEM closes the Quality gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to SNDK's edge.
- 2TSEM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3SNDK'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
SNDK leads on balance| Metric | SNDK | TSEM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 50.7% | 11.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 92.9% | 40.4% |
| Gross margin | 71.5% | 26.9% |
| Operating margin | 61.2% | 16.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 93.1% | 9.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | 0.05 |
Performance
SNDK leads 5 of 5 windows| Metric | SNDK | TSEM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 17.2% | 6.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 43.5% | -11.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 11.6% | -5.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 230% | 101% |
| Year to date | 633% | 89.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | — | 257.1% |
Technicals
SNDK has the stronger structure| Metric | SNDK | TSEM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 46.7 | 31.1 |
| ADX (14) | 11.8 | 14.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 12.2% | -3.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 73.3% | 19.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 89.7% | 65.1% |
Risk
TSEM is the more resilient| Metric | SNDK | TSEM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.23 | 2.92 |
| Sharpe ratio | 3.42 | 1.94 |
| Sortino ratio | 5.92 | 3.24 |
| Max drawdown | -56.5% | -40.7% |
| Current drawdown | -25.5% | -29.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 116.8% | 79% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -10.7% | -7.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SNDK or TSEM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SNDK is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 70 against TSEM's 39. The edge comes from quality and momentum. 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 SNDK or TSEM the better buy right now?
SNDK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 SNDK over TSEM?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. SNDK leads Quality by 49 points; SNDK leads Momentum by 47 points; SNDK leads Value by 25 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SNDK or TSEM?
Analyst price targets imply +7.1% upside for SNDK and +34.9% for TSEM, so the Street currently favors TSEM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SNDK. 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, SNDK or TSEM?
SNDK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SNDK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 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, SNDK or TSEM?
SNDK 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, SNDK or TSEM?
SNDK on the Momentum factor, by 47 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, SNDK or TSEM?
TSEM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSEM on Risk Resilience, by 19 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 SNDK more profitable than TSEM?
SNDK leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 71.5% vs 26.9%; operating margin 61.2% vs 16.2%; ttm roe 93.1% vs 9.8%.
Is SNDK's lead over TSEM getting stronger or weaker?
SNDK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 31 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the SNDK vs TSEM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TSEM closes the Quality gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to SNDK's edge; TSEM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; SNDK'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 SNDK and TSEM?
SNDK: 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 SNDK is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TSEM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare SNDK 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.