SOLV vs TMDX Stock Comparison
SOLV currently leads TMDX in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 57 vs 39. The clearest difference is value.
What is the main difference between SOLV and TMDX?
SOLV leads the current stock comparison as Solventum Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Solventum Corporation vs TransMedics Group, Inc.
SOLV leads
SOLV leads by 18 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors TMDX on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support SOLV, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Solventum Corporation
TransMedics Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SOLV over TMDX, 57 versus 39 as of Oct 31, 2026. SOLV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience. SOLV also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TMDX. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SOLV today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. SOLV lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Solventum Corporation and TransMedics Group, Inc. 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 SOLV and TMDX 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.
- Value67 vs 32SOLV +35
- Risk Resilience55 vs 31SOLV +24
- Momentum36 vs 23SOLV +13
- Quality67 vs 64Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor SOLV. SOLV’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
SOLV's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SOLV and TMDX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SOLV (Solventum Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
TMDX (TransMedics Group, Inc.): the counter-case, on fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 49.2% against 22.5%.
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
SOLVSOLV on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TMDXTMDX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SOLVSOLV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 points.
Momentum
SOLVSOLV on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
SOLVSOLV on Risk Resilience, by 24 points.
Analyst upside
TMDXTMDX on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SOLV, analyst targets favor TMDX. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | SOLV | TMDX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.2% | +55.4% | TMDX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +77.4% | +75.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 8 | 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 SOLV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SOLV | 57 vs 39 |
| Fundamentals | TMDXon balance | revenue growth 10.1% vs 9.2%; EPS growth 6.6% vs 100%; TTM ROE 29% vs 33%; gross margin 54.7% vs 58.7%; operating margin 25% vs 12.2% — TMDX takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SOLV | Value 67 vs 32 |
| Technicals | SOLV | Price vs 50-day -7.9% vs -20.2%; vs 200-day 4.5% vs -29.8% |
| Risk Resilience | SOLV | Risk Resilience 55 vs 31 |
| Analyst expectations | TMDX | Target upside 11.2% vs 55.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SOLV and TMDX 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 18 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 SOLV.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28SOLV lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SOLV +18
- 57 vs 39
- 7 sessions ago
- SOLV +20
- 59 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- SOLV +17
- 58 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- SOLV +17
- 68 vs 51
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.
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SOLV
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.74%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only TMDX
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (15.18%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.52%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Keltner Channel Breakdown, MACD Bearish Crossover.
SOLV 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -2.67%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.68%, 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.
- 1TMDX closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to SOLV's edge.
- 2TMDX's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3SOLV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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
TMDX leads on balance| Metric | SOLV | TMDX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.1% | 9.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 6.6% | 100% |
| Gross margin | 54.7% | 58.7% |
| Operating margin | 25% | 12.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 29% | 33% |
| Debt to equity | 1.1 | 1.67 |
Performance
SOLV leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | SOLV | TMDX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.6% | -7.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.1% | -19.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.7% | -12.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 23.1% | -32.1% |
| Year to date | 3.3% | -45% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 14.6% | -47.1% |
Technicals
SOLV has the stronger structure| Metric | SOLV | TMDX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.6 | 25.4 |
| ADX (14) | 18.3 | 29 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.9% | -20.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.5% | -29.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.5% | 49.2% |
Risk
SOLV is the more resilient| Metric | SOLV | TMDX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.56 | 1.09 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.5 | -0.93 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.8 | -1.24 |
| Max drawdown | -27.5% | -58.8% |
| Current drawdown | -11.5% | -55.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 30% | 57.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -5.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SOLV or TMDX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SOLV is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 57 against TMDX's 39. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. 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 SOLV or TMDX the better buy right now?
SOLV carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 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 SOLV over TMDX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SOLV leads Value by 35 points; SOLV leads Risk Resilience by 24 points; SOLV leads Momentum by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SOLV or TMDX?
Analyst price targets imply +11.2% upside for SOLV and +55.4% for TMDX, so the Street currently favors TMDX. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SOLV. 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, SOLV or TMDX?
SOLV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SOLV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 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, SOLV or TMDX?
TMDX 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, SOLV or TMDX?
SOLV on the Momentum factor, by 13 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, SOLV or TMDX?
SOLV is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SOLV on Risk Resilience, by 24 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 SOLV more profitable than TMDX?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 54.7% vs 58.7%; operating margin 25% vs 12.2%; ttm roe 29% vs 33%. SOLV leads on one measure and TMDX 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 SOLV's lead over TMDX getting stronger or weaker?
SOLV lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 18 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the SOLV vs TMDX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TMDX closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to SOLV's edge; TMDX's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; SOLV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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 SOLV and TMDX?
SOLV: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TMDX: 1 bullish / 4 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 SOLV is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TMDX it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SOLV and TMDX 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.