TEVA vs VRTX Stock Comparison
Compare TEVA and VRTX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between TEVA and VRTX?
VRTX leads the current stock comparison as Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited vs Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated
VRTX leads
VRTX leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors TEVA on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support VRTX, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VRTX over TEVA, 62 versus 52 as of Sep 6, 2026. VRTX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while TEVA holds the stronger value profile. VRTX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TEVA. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor VRTX today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. VRTX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited and Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated 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 TEVA and VRTX 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.
- Quality30%33 vs 82VRTX +49
- Value30%65 vs 32TEVA +33
- Momentum25%60 vs 72VRTX +12
- Risk Resilience15%53 vs 62VRTX +9
4 of 6 evidence groups favor VRTX. VRTX’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; TEVA keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
VRTX's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TEVA and VRTX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
VRTX (Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
TEVA (Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations.
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
VRTXVRTX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
VRTXVRTX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TEVATEVA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 33 points.
Momentum
VRTXVRTX on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
VRTXVRTX on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
TEVATEVA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors VRTX, analyst targets favor TEVA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TEVA | VRTX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.3% | +1.5% | TEVA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +18.6% | +56.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 12 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor VRTX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | VRTX | 52 vs 62 |
| Fundamentals | VRTX | revenue growth 4% vs 11.6%; EPS growth -253.1% vs 6.7%; TTM ROE 9.2% vs 23.3%; gross margin 52.5% vs 86%; operating margin 14.9% vs 38.6% |
| Valuation | TEVA | Value 65 vs 32 |
| Technicals | VRTX | Price vs 50-day 5% vs 7.3%; vs 200-day 11.6% vs 17.2% |
| Risk Resilience | VRTX | Risk Resilience 53 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | TEVA | Target upside 18.3% vs 1.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TEVA and VRTX 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 10 points.
- 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 VRTX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5VRTX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VRTX +10
- 52 vs 62
- 7 sessions ago
- VRTX +9
- 52 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- VRTX +8
- 56 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- VRTX +16
- 52 vs 68
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Apr 27 when TEVA moved ahead of VRTX.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.26%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (9.14%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.6%)
VRTX 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 -0.71%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.12%, 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.
- 1TEVA closes the Quality gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to VRTX's edge.
- 2TEVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3VRTX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
VRTX leads on balance| Metric | TEVA | VRTX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4% | 11.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -253.1% | 6.7% |
| Gross margin | 52.5% | 86% |
| Operating margin | 14.9% | 38.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9.2% | 23.3% |
| Debt to equity | 2.16 | 0.1 |
Performance
VRTX leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | TEVA | VRTX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.2% | 0.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.8% | 10.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 6.3% | 22.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 17.1% | 19.6% |
| Year to date | 16.5% | 20.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 93.8% | 37.7% |
Technicals
VRTX has the stronger structure| Metric | TEVA | VRTX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 49.4 | 65 |
| ADX (14) | 33.1 | 36.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 5% | 7.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 11.6% | 17.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.3% | 33.3% |
Risk
VRTX is the more resilient| Metric | TEVA | VRTX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.72 | 0.51 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.8 | 1.12 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.9 | 2.21 |
| Max drawdown | -21.8% | -15.2% |
| Current drawdown | -4.6% | -2.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 39.9% | 28.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TEVA or VRTX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, VRTX is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 62 against TEVA's 52. The edge comes from quality and momentum. TEVA 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 TEVA or VRTX the better buy right now?
VRTX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 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 VRTX over TEVA?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. VRTX leads Quality by 49 points; TEVA leads Value by 33 points; VRTX leads Momentum by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TEVA or VRTX?
Analyst price targets imply +18.3% upside for TEVA and +1.5% for VRTX, so the Street currently favors TEVA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors VRTX. 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, TEVA or VRTX?
TEVA is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TEVA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 33 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, TEVA or VRTX?
VRTX 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, TEVA or VRTX?
VRTX on the Momentum factor, by 12 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, TEVA or VRTX?
VRTX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. VRTX on Risk Resilience, by 9 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is TEVA more profitable than VRTX?
VRTX leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 52.5% vs 86%; operating margin 14.9% vs 38.6%; ttm roe 9.2% vs 23.3%.
Is VRTX's lead over TEVA getting stronger or weaker?
VRTX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-04-27, when TEVA moved ahead of VRTX.
What would change the TEVA vs VRTX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TEVA closes the Quality gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to VRTX's edge; TEVA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; VRTX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about TEVA and VRTX?
TEVA: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. VRTX: 4 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 TEVA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On VRTX it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare TEVA and VRTX with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.