MAG vs TECH Stock Comparison
TECH currently leads MAG in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 60 vs 55. The clearest difference is quality, while MAG has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between MAG and TECH?
TECH leads the current stock comparison as Bio-Techne Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
MAG Silver Corp. vs Bio-Techne Corporation
TECH leads
TECH leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality. Wall Street currently favors MAG on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 5 evidence groups support TECH, and its current signal state is conflicted.
MAG Silver Corp.
Bio-Techne Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TECH over MAG, 60 versus 55 as of Oct 31, 2026. TECH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while MAG holds the stronger value profile. Analyst target upside, however, currently favors MAG. 1 of 5 covered evidence groups favor TECH today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. TECH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare MAG Silver Corp. and Bio-Techne Corporation 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 MAG and TECH 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.
- Quality40 vs 66TECH +26
- Value47 vs 26MAG +21
- Risk Resilience100 vs 91MAG +9
1 of 5 evidence groups favor TECH. TECH’s edge is concentrated in quality; MAG keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
TECH's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MAG and TECH both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TECH (Bio-Techne Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
MAG (MAG Silver Corp.): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
TECHTECH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MAGMAG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MAGMAG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
MAGMAG on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
MAGMAG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TECH, analyst targets favor MAG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | MAG | TECH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -10.1% | -11.8% | MAG has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +37.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 9 | 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 5 covered evidence groups favor TECH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TECH | 55 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | MAG | EPS growth 17.9% vs 6.1%; TTM ROE 10.3% vs 8.9% |
| Valuation | MAG | Value 47 vs 26 |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | MAG | Risk Resilience 100 vs 91 |
| Analyst expectations | MAG | Target upside -10.1% vs -11.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MAG and TECH 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 TECH.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28TECH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TECH +5
- 55 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- TECH +1
- 55 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- TECH +3
- 55 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- TECH +2
- 56 vs 58
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Sep 9 when MAG moved ahead of TECH.
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.
No active signals
No signal that the other name lacks.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only TECH
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (14.80%)
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.20%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
TECH 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 -0.07%, 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.
- 1MAG closes the Quality gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to TECH's edge.
- 2MAG generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3TECH's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 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
MAG leads on balance| Metric | MAG | TECH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0% | 3.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 17.9% | 6.1% |
| Gross margin | 0% | 65.8% |
| Operating margin | 0% | 20.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.3% | 8.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0 | 0.14 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | MAG | TECH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | — | 0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | — | 0.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | — | 0.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | — | 39.9% |
| Year to date | — | 23.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | — | 10.3% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | MAG | TECH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | — | 63 |
| ADX (14) | — | 43.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | — | 0.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | — | 15.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | — | 2% |
Risk
MAG is the more resilient| Metric | MAG | TECH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | — | 0.78 |
| Sharpe ratio | — | 0.42 |
| Sortino ratio | — | 0.55 |
| Max drawdown | — | -39.3% |
| Current drawdown | — | 0% |
| Annualized volatility | — | 43.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | — | -3.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MAG or TECH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TECH is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 60 against MAG's 55. The edge comes from quality. MAG is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 MAG or TECH the better buy right now?
TECH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TECH over MAG?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TECH leads Quality by 26 points; MAG leads Value by 21 points; MAG leads Risk Resilience by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MAG or TECH?
Analyst price targets imply -10.1% upside for MAG and -11.8% for TECH, so the Street currently favors MAG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TECH. 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, MAG or TECH?
MAG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MAG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 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, MAG or TECH?
MAG 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, MAG or TECH?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, MAG or TECH?
MAG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MAG on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 MAG more profitable than TECH?
MAG leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 0% vs 65.8%; operating margin 0% vs 20.7%; ttm roe 10.3% vs 8.9%.
Is TECH's lead over MAG getting stronger or weaker?
TECH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions. 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 2026-09-09, when MAG moved ahead of TECH.
What would change the MAG vs TECH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MAG closes the Quality gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to TECH's edge; MAG generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; TECH's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 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 MAG and TECH?
MAG: No active signals. TECH: 4 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. On TECH it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MAG and TECH 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.