SWKS vs WOLF Stock Comparison
Compare SWKS and WOLF across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between SWKS and WOLF?
SWKS leads the current stock comparison as Skyworks Solutions, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Skyworks Solutions, Inc. vs Wolfspeed Inc.
SWKS leads
SWKS leads by 32 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 25 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 6 of 6 evidence groups support SWKS, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Skyworks Solutions, Inc.
Wolfspeed Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SWKS over WOLF, 66 versus 34 as of Sep 11, 2026. SWKS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum. SWKS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 6 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SWKS today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. SWKS lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 32 points over 30 sessions. SWKS leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare Skyworks Solutions, Inc. and Wolfspeed Inc. 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 SWKS and WOLF 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.
- Quality52 vs 3SWKS +49
- Momentum83 vs 39SWKS +44
- Risk Resilience52 vs 29SWKS +23
- Value72 vs 64SWKS +8
6 of 6 evidence groups favor SWKS. SWKS’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -7
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
SWKS's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SWKS and WOLF both carry a full feed there.
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
SWKSSWKS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SWKSSWKS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SWKSSWKS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
SWKSSWKS on the Momentum factor, by 44 points.
Lower downside
SWKSSWKS on Risk Resilience, by 23 points.
Analyst upside
SWKSSWKS 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 | SWKS | WOLF | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -20.9% | -22.8% | SWKS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +55.8% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
6 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SWKS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SWKS | 66 vs 34 |
| Fundamentals | SWKSon balance | revenue growth -0.9% vs -0.4%; EPS growth -8.3% vs -22.2%; TTM ROE 5% vs -282.7%; gross margin 40.7% vs -34.9%; operating margin 7.9% vs -79.1% — SWKS takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SWKS | Value 72 vs 64 |
| Technicals | SWKS | Price vs 50-day 34.8% vs -11.9%; vs 200-day 25.7% vs -13.1% |
| Risk Resilience | SWKS | Risk Resilience 52 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | SWKS | Target upside -20.9% vs -22.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SWKS and WOLF 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 32 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 6 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 SWKS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10SWKS lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 32 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SWKS +32
- 66 vs 34
- 7 sessions ago
- SWKS +35
- 66 vs 31
- 30 sessions ago
- SWKS +25
- 64 vs 39
- 90 sessions ago
- SWKS +16
- 49 vs 33
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.
5 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.16%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.52%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (10.46%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
SWKS 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +5.14%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.98%, 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.
- 1WOLF closes the Quality gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to SWKS's edge.
- 2WOLF's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3SWKS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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
SWKS leads on balance| Metric | SWKS | WOLF |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.9% | -0.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -8.3% | -22.2% |
| Gross margin | 40.7% | -34.9% |
| Operating margin | 7.9% | -79.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 5% | -282.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.12 | 1.82 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | SWKS | WOLF |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 17.1% | -5.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 20.6% | -20.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 19.5% | -42% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 38.1% | 38.3% |
| Year to date | 28.3% | 44.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 8.5% | 1946.3% |
Technicals
SWKS has the stronger structure| Metric | SWKS | WOLF |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 83.5 | 45.7 |
| ADX (14) | 19.1 | 12.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 34.8% | -11.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 25.7% | -13.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 46.4% | 88.4% |
Risk
SWKS is the more resilient| Metric | SWKS | WOLF |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.51 | 6.71 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.39 | 1.03 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.59 | 22.44 |
| Max drawdown | -36.7% | -72.7% |
| Current drawdown | 0% | -65.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 48.1% | 1735.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.9% | -11.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SWKS or WOLF?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SWKS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 66 against WOLF's 34. The edge comes from quality and momentum. 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 SWKS or WOLF the better buy right now?
SWKS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 6 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 SWKS over WOLF?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SWKS leads Quality by 49 points; SWKS leads Momentum by 44 points; SWKS leads Risk Resilience by 23 points. SWKS leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by WOLF simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, SWKS or WOLF?
Analyst price targets imply -20.9% upside for SWKS and -22.8% for WOLF, so the Street currently favors SWKS. 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, SWKS or WOLF?
SWKS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SWKS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 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, SWKS or WOLF?
SWKS 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, SWKS or WOLF?
SWKS on the Momentum factor, by 44 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, SWKS or WOLF?
SWKS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SWKS on Risk Resilience, by 23 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 SWKS more profitable than WOLF?
SWKS leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 40.7% vs -34.9%; operating margin 7.9% vs -79.1%; ttm roe 5% vs -282.7%.
Is SWKS's lead over WOLF getting stronger or weaker?
SWKS lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 32 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the SWKS vs WOLF verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: WOLF closes the Quality gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to SWKS's edge; WOLF's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; SWKS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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 SWKS and WOLF?
SWKS: 5 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WOLF: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 SWKS is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On WOLF it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare SWKS and WOLF 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.