TJX vs UA Stock Comparison
TJX currently leads UA in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 56 vs 45. The clearest difference is quality, while UA has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between TJX and UA?
TJX leads the current stock comparison as The TJX Companies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
The TJX Companies, Inc. vs Under Armour, Inc.
TJX leads
TJX leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 15 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support TJX, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The TJX Companies, Inc.
Under Armour, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TJX over UA, 56 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. TJX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while UA holds the stronger value profile. TJX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TJX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. TJX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare The TJX Companies, Inc. and Under Armour, Inc. 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 TJX and UA 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.
- Quality64 vs 37TJX +27
- Momentum76 vs 58TJX +18
- Value30 vs 42UA +12
- Risk Resilience59 vs 47TJX +12
4 of 6 evidence groups favor TJX. TJX’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; UA keeps a meaningful value edge.
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 -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
TJX's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TJX and UA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TJX (The TJX Companies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
UA (Under Armour, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 34.5% against 17.6%.
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
TJXTJX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
UAUA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
UAUA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 12 points.
Momentum
TJXTJX on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
TJXTJX on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
TJXTJX 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 | TJX | UA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +21.5% | +20.4% | TJX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +30% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TJX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TJX | 56 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 6% vs -6.3%; EPS growth 14.3% vs 101.3%; TTM ROE 59.8% vs -32.1%; gross margin 32.1% vs 47% |
| Valuation | UA | Value 30 vs 42 |
| Technicals | TJX | Price vs 50-day 6.3% vs -5.3%; vs 200-day -3.1% vs -18.3% |
| Risk Resilience | TJX | Risk Resilience 59 vs 47 |
| Analyst expectations | TJX | Target upside 21.5% vs 20.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TJX and UA 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 moderate at 11 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 TJX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TJX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TJX +11
- 56 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- TJX +11
- 56 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- TJX +15
- 52 vs 37
- 90 sessions ago
- TJX +7
- 42 vs 35
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jun 25 when UA moved ahead of TJX.
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, conflicted
Only TJX
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only UA
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.72%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, RSI Overbought, MACD Bullish Crossover.
TJX 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 -1%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -3.99%, 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.
- 1UA closes the Quality gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to TJX's edge.
- 2UA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TJX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 11-point move would eliminate TJX's advantage entirely.
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 | TJX | UA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6% | -6.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 14.3% | 101.3% |
| Gross margin | 32.1% | 47% |
| Operating margin | 12.8% | 0.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 59.8% | -32.1% |
| Debt to equity | 1.34 | 0.96 |
Performance
TJX leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | TJX | UA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3.9% | 0% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 12.4% | 2.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.4% | -32.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -7.7% | -26.9% |
| Year to date | -4.3% | -0.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 3.1% | 3% |
Technicals
TJX has the stronger structure| Metric | TJX | UA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 85.7 | 70.7 |
| ADX (14) | 34.4 | 19.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.3% | -5.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.1% | -18.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 17.6% | 34.5% |
Risk
TJX is the more resilient| Metric | TJX | UA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.13 | 1.32 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.02 | 0.25 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.03 | 0.37 |
| Max drawdown | -27.1% | -46.5% |
| Current drawdown | -12.7% | -39.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 21.1% | 52.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.9% | -5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TJX or UA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TJX is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 56 against UA's 45. The edge comes from quality and momentum. UA 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 TJX or UA the better buy right now?
TJX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TJX over UA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TJX leads Quality by 27 points; TJX leads Momentum by 18 points; UA leads Value by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TJX or UA?
Analyst price targets imply +21.5% upside for TJX and +20.4% for UA, so the Street currently favors TJX. 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, TJX or UA?
UA is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. UA 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, TJX or UA?
UA 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, TJX or UA?
TJX on the Momentum factor, by 18 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, TJX or UA?
TJX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TJX on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 TJX more profitable than UA?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 32.1% vs 47%; operating margin 12.8% vs 0.3%; ttm roe 59.8% vs -32.1%. Each name leads 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 TJX's lead over UA getting stronger or weaker?
TJX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 11 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 once in that window, most recently on 2026-06-25, when UA moved ahead of TJX.
What would change the TJX vs UA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: UA closes the Quality gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to TJX's edge; UA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TJX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 11-point move would eliminate TJX's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about TJX and UA?
TJX: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. UA: 1 bullish / 3 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. The most decision-relevant rule on TJX is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On UA it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare TJX and UA 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.