SYK vs TMDX Stock Comparison
Compare SYK and TMDX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between SYK and TMDX?
TMDX leads the current stock comparison as TransMedics Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Stryker Corporation vs TransMedics Group, Inc.
TMDX leads
TMDX leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum. Wall Street currently favors SYK on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support TMDX.
Stryker Corporation
TransMedics Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TMDX over SYK, 45 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. TMDX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while SYK holds the stronger risk resilience profile. TMDX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors SYK. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TMDX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. TMDX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Stryker Corporation and TransMedics Group, 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 SYK 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.
- Momentum8 vs 43TMDX +35
- Risk Resilience55 vs 34SYK +21
- Value42 vs 32SYK +10
- Quality66 vs 64Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor TMDX. TMDX’s edge is concentrated in momentum; SYK keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
TMDX's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SYK and TMDX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TMDX (TransMedics Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
SYK (Stryker Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience, value, valuation.
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
TMDXTMDX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TMDXTMDX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SYKSYK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
TMDXTMDX on the Momentum factor, by 35 points.
Lower downside
SYKSYK on Risk Resilience, by 21 points.
Analyst upside
SYKSYK on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TMDX, analyst targets favor SYK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | SYK | TMDX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +36.1% | +23.9% | SYK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +28% | +75.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 7 | 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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TMDX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 43 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 9.5% vs 9.2%; EPS growth 70.3% vs 100%; TTM ROE 16.4% vs 33%; gross margin 65.2% vs 58.7%; operating margin 22% vs 12.2% |
| Valuation | SYK | Value 42 vs 32 |
| Technicals | TMDX | Price vs 50-day -15.4% vs 1.1%; vs 200-day -19.9% vs -18.4% |
| Risk Resilience | SYK | Risk Resilience 55 vs 34 |
| Analyst expectations | SYK | Target upside 36.1% vs 23.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SYK and TMDX 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 narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 TMDX.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TMDX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TMDX +2
- 43 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- TMDX +2
- 45 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 52 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- SYK +16
- 58 vs 42
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Sep 3 when TMDX moved ahead of SYK.
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 / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.49%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (28.17%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.83%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
SYK 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 +2.06%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -3.36%, AIQ +1 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.
- 1SYK closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to TMDX's edge.
- 2SYK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TMDX 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
Split| Metric | SYK | TMDX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 9.5% | 9.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 70.3% | 100% |
| Gross margin | 65.2% | 58.7% |
| Operating margin | 22% | 12.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16.4% | 33% |
| Debt to equity | 0.62 | 1.67 |
Performance
TMDX leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SYK | TMDX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -11.5% | 0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -18.8% | -2.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -12.6% | 13.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -21.9% | -34.1% |
| Year to date | -19.5% | -30.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -30.5% | -19.5% |
Technicals
TMDX has the stronger structure| Metric | SYK | TMDX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 15.6 | 40 |
| ADX (14) | 21.8 | 17.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -15.4% | 1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -19.9% | -18.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 38% | 43.4% |
Risk
SYK is the more resilient| Metric | SYK | TMDX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.15 | 1.22 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.26 | -0.2 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.73 | -0.26 |
| Max drawdown | -31.3% | -58.8% |
| Current drawdown | -31.3% | -43.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 29.5% | 57.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3% | -5.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SYK or TMDX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TMDX is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 45 against SYK's 43. The edge comes from momentum. SYK 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 SYK or TMDX the better buy right now?
TMDX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TMDX over SYK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TMDX leads Momentum by 35 points; SYK leads Risk Resilience by 21 points; SYK leads Value by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SYK or TMDX?
Analyst price targets imply +36.1% upside for SYK and +23.9% for TMDX, so the Street currently favors SYK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TMDX. 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, SYK or TMDX?
SYK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SYK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, SYK 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, SYK or TMDX?
TMDX on the Momentum factor, by 35 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, SYK or TMDX?
SYK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SYK on Risk Resilience, by 21 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 SYK more profitable than TMDX?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 65.2% vs 58.7%; operating margin 22% vs 12.2%; ttm roe 16.4% vs 33%. SYK leads on two measures and TMDX 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 TMDX's lead over SYK getting stronger or weaker?
TMDX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-03, when TMDX moved ahead of SYK.
What would change the SYK vs TMDX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SYK closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to TMDX's edge; SYK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TMDX 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 SYK and TMDX?
SYK: 2 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TMDX: 0 bullish / 2 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 SYK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TMDX it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SYK 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.