TAL vs YMM Stock Comparison
YMM currently leads TAL in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 52. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while TAL has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between TAL and YMM?
YMM leads the current stock comparison as Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
TAL Education Group vs Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd.
YMM leads
YMM leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from TAL. Wall Street currently favors TAL on target upside.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support YMM, and the lead recently changed hands.
TAL Education Group
Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors YMM over TAL, 59 versus 52 as of Oct 31, 2026. YMM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while TAL holds the stronger quality profile. YMM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TAL. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor YMM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. YMM lead: Reversed — TAL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; YMM now leads by 7.
Compare TAL Education Group and Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare TAL and YMM 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.
- Risk Resilience42 vs 61YMM +19
- Momentum24 vs 37YMM +13
- Value55 vs 67YMM +12
- Quality78 vs 70TAL +8
5 of 6 evidence groups favor YMM. YMM’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; TAL keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
YMM's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TAL and YMM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
YMM (Full Truck Alliance Co. Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
TAL (TAL Education Group): the counter-case, on quality, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 41.5% against 31.8%.
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
YMMYMM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TALTAL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
YMMYMM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
YMMYMM on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
YMMYMM on Risk Resilience, by 19 points.
Analyst upside
TALTAL on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors YMM, analyst targets favor TAL. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TAL | YMM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +37.8% | +34.2% | TAL has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +29.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor YMM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | YMM | 52 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | YMMon balance | revenue growth -6.1% vs 18.4%; EPS growth 64.4% vs 8.2%; TTM ROE 24.6% vs 10.6%; gross margin 56% vs 65.9%; operating margin 12.5% vs 33.6% — YMM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | YMM | Value 55 vs 67 |
| Technicals | YMM | Price vs 50-day -16.3% vs -0.8%; vs 200-day -9.5% vs -8.3% |
| Risk Resilience | YMM | Risk Resilience 42 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | TAL | Target upside 37.8% vs 34.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TAL and YMM 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 moderate at 7 points.
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 YMM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28YMM lead: Reversed — TAL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; YMM now leads by 7.
- Today
- YMM +7
- 52 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- YMM +8
- 52 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- TAL +4
- 68 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- YMM +3
- 57 vs 60
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 12 when YMM moved ahead of TAL.
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 / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only TAL
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.14%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.90%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish
Only YMM
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.47%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bearish Crossover.
TAL 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 -2.66%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +3.46%, 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.
- 1TAL closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to YMM's edge.
- 2TAL's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3YMM 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
YMM leads on balance| Metric | TAL | YMM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -6.1% | 18.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 64.4% | 8.2% |
| Gross margin | 56% | 65.9% |
| Operating margin | 12.5% | 33.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 24.6% | 10.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.1 | 0 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | TAL | YMM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.6% | -4.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -16.7% | -2.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -18.5% | -15.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -7.3% | -2.9% |
| Year to date | -7.8% | -24.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -19.7% | -38% |
Technicals
YMM has the stronger structure| Metric | TAL | YMM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 15 | 44.1 |
| ADX (14) | 28.6 | 20.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -16.3% | -0.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -9.5% | -8.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 41.5% | 31.8% |
Risk
YMM is the more resilient| Metric | TAL | YMM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.6 | 1.12 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.31 | -1.28 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.55 | -1.66 |
| Max drawdown | -30.7% | -42.4% |
| Current drawdown | -22.1% | -38.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 44.9% | 35.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.7% | -3.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TAL or YMM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, YMM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 59 against TAL's 52. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. TAL is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 TAL or YMM the better buy right now?
YMM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 5 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 YMM over TAL?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. YMM leads Risk Resilience by 19 points; YMM leads Momentum by 13 points; YMM leads Value by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TAL or YMM?
Analyst price targets imply +37.8% upside for TAL and +34.2% for YMM, so the Street currently favors TAL. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors YMM. 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, TAL or YMM?
YMM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. YMM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 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, TAL or YMM?
TAL 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, TAL or YMM?
YMM 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, TAL or YMM?
YMM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. YMM on Risk Resilience, by 19 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 TAL more profitable than YMM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 56% vs 65.9%; operating margin 12.5% vs 33.6%; ttm roe 24.6% vs 10.6%. TAL leads on one measure and YMM 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 YMM's lead over TAL getting stronger or weaker?
YMM lead: Reversed — TAL led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; YMM now leads by 7. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-12, when YMM moved ahead of TAL.
What would change the TAL vs YMM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TAL closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to YMM's edge; TAL's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; YMM 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 TAL and YMM?
TAL: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. YMM: 0 bullish / 3 bearish. 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 TAL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On YMM it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare TAL and YMM 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.