TEL vs UMC Stock Comparison
TEL currently leads UMC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 65 vs 51. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between TEL and UMC?
TEL leads the current stock comparison as TE Connectivity plc, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
TE Connectivity plc vs United Microelectronics Corporation
TEL leads
TEL leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support TEL, and its lead is widening.
TE Connectivity plc
United Microelectronics Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TEL over UMC, 65 versus 51 as of Oct 21, 2026. TEL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience. TEL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TEL today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. TEL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare TE Connectivity plc and United Microelectronics 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 TEL and UMC 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.
- Momentum62 vs 30TEL +32
- Risk Resilience68 vs 45TEL +23
- Value67 vs 60TEL +7
- Quality63 vs 63Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor TEL. TEL’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +10
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
TEL's lead widened by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TEL and UMC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TEL (TE Connectivity plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
UMC (United Microelectronics Corporation): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 50.3% against 22.6%.
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
TELTEL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
UMCUMC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TELTEL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 points.
Momentum
TELTEL on the Momentum factor, by 32 points.
Lower downside
TELTEL on Risk Resilience, by 23 points.
Analyst upside
TELTEL 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 | TEL | UMC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16.8% | -48.5% | TEL has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Sell | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | TEL | UMC |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 7.91% | 28.77% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.900 | $0.137 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.780 | $0.483 |
| Years increased | 5 | 4 |
| No cut in window | Yes | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | #148 | not ranked |
UMC grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 28.77% a year against TEL's 7.91%. TEL never reduced its regular dividend in the window; UMC did in 1 year. They are ranked in different cohorts — US dividend-paying corporations and variable-dividend payers — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TEL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TEL | 65 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 8.8% vs 12.6%; EPS growth -12% vs 160.8%; TTM ROE 23.2% vs 21%; gross margin 35.4% vs 30.6%; operating margin 19.1% vs 18.9% |
| Valuation | TEL | Value 67 vs 60 |
| Technicals | UMC | Price vs 50-day 1.8% vs -8.5%; vs 200-day 0.1% vs 20% |
| Risk Resilience | TEL | Risk Resilience 68 vs 45 |
| Analyst expectations | TEL | Target upside 16.8% vs -48.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TEL and UMC 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 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 TEL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TEL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TEL +14
- 65 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- TEL +9
- 61 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- TEL +3
- 65 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- TEL +6
- 63 vs 57
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Sep 14 when UMC moved ahead of TEL.
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish
Only TEL
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.50%)
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only UMC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (30.11%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.82%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bearish Crossover.
UMC 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.2%, AIQ +3 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.76%, 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.
- 1UMC closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to TEL's edge.
- 2UMC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3TEL 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 | TEL | UMC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.8% | 12.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -12% | 160.8% |
| Gross margin | 35.4% | 30.6% |
| Operating margin | 19.1% | 18.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 23.2% | 21% |
| Debt to equity | 0.43 | 0.12 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | TEL | UMC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1% | -12.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.1% | -23.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 6.7% | -7.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -12.1% | 59.5% |
| Year to date | -6.1% | 150.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -4.7% | 164.7% |
Technicals
UMC has the stronger structure| Metric | TEL | UMC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.9 | 24.4 |
| ADX (14) | 14.3 | 23 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.8% | -8.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.1% | 20% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.6% | 50.3% |
Risk
TEL is the more resilient| Metric | TEL | UMC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.6 | 1.77 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.05 | 1.76 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.07 | 3.19 |
| Max drawdown | -21.4% | -38.9% |
| Current drawdown | -14.2% | -29.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 35.3% | 64.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | -5.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TEL or UMC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TEL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 65 against UMC's 51. The edge comes from momentum 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 TEL or UMC the better buy right now?
TEL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 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 TEL over UMC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TEL leads Momentum by 32 points; TEL leads Risk Resilience by 23 points; TEL leads Value by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TEL or UMC?
Analyst price targets imply +16.8% upside for TEL and -48.5% for UMC, so the Street currently favors TEL. 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, TEL or UMC?
TEL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TEL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 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, TEL or UMC?
UMC 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, TEL or UMC?
TEL on the Momentum factor, by 32 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, TEL or UMC?
TEL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TEL 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 TEL more profitable than UMC?
TEL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 35.4% vs 30.6%; operating margin 19.1% vs 18.9%; ttm roe 23.2% vs 21%.
Is TEL's lead over UMC getting stronger or weaker?
TEL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-14, when UMC moved ahead of TEL.
What would change the TEL vs UMC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: UMC closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to TEL's edge; UMC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; TEL 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 TEL and UMC?
TEL: 0 bullish / 2 bearish. UMC: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 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 TEL is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On UMC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare TEL and UMC 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.