TSLA vs GM Stock Comparison
TSLA currently leads GM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 42 vs 40. The clearest difference is quality, while GM has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between TSLA and GM?
TSLA leads the current stock comparison as Tesla, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Tesla, Inc. vs General Motors Company
TSLA leads
TSLA leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from GM. Wall Street currently favors GM on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TSLA, and the lead recently changed hands.
Tesla, Inc.
General Motors Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TSLA over GM, 42 versus 40 as of Oct 21, 2026. TSLA's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while GM holds the stronger value profile. TSLA also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors GM. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TSLA today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. TSLA lead: Reversed — GM led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TSLA now leads by 2.
Compare Tesla, Inc. and General Motors Company 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 TSLA and GM 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.
- Value24 vs 72GM +48
- Quality41 vs 6TSLA +35
- Momentum60 vs 42TSLA +18
- Risk Resilience51 vs 44TSLA +7
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TSLA. TSLA’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; GM 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 +3, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -13
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
The lead changed hands: TSLA moved ahead of GM in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TSLA and GM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TSLA (Tesla, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
GM (General Motors Company): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 40.6% against 32.9%.
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
TSLATSLA on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TSLATSLA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
GMGM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 48 points.
Momentum
TSLATSLA on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
TSLATSLA on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
GMGM on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TSLA, analyst targets favor GM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TSLA | GM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +14% | +26.1% | GM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +155% | +101.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 14 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TSLA. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 42 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | TSLA | revenue growth 26.1% vs 10.1%; EPS growth 126.7% vs -51.1%; TTM ROE 4.6% vs 3%; gross margin 18.9% vs 5.7% |
| Valuation | GM | Value 24 vs 72 |
| Technicals | TSLA | Price vs 50-day 7% vs -9.4%; vs 200-day -3.5% vs -4.3% |
| Risk Resilience | TSLA | Risk Resilience 51 vs 44 |
| Analyst expectations | GM | Target upside 14% vs 26.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TSLA and GM 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 TSLA.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TSLA lead: Reversed — GM led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TSLA now leads by 2.
- Today
- TSLA +2
- 42 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- GM +5
- 39 vs 44
- 30 sessions ago
- GM +2
- 37 vs 39
- 90 sessions ago
- TSLA +3
- 44 vs 41
The lead changed hands 12 times in this window, most recently on Oct 20 when TSLA moved ahead of GM.
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 TSLA
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.24%)
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only GM
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.17%)
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bearish Crossover.
GM 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 +3.41%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.27%, AIQ -5 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.
- 1GM closes the Quality gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSLA's edge.
- 2GM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3TSLA 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
TSLA leads on balance| Metric | TSLA | GM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 26.1% | 10.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 126.7% | -51.1% |
| Gross margin | 18.9% | 5.7% |
| Operating margin | 4.2% | 1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 4.6% | 3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.11 | 2.06 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | TSLA | GM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.4% | -7.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.4% | -7.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -0.1% | -6.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -3.3% | -2.5% |
| Year to date | -16.9% | -5.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.8% | 34.4% |
Technicals
TSLA has the stronger structure| Metric | TSLA | GM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.8 | 50.2 |
| ADX (14) | 12.8 | 19.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7% | -9.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.5% | -4.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.9% | 40.6% |
Risk
TSLA is the more resilient| Metric | TSLA | GM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.23 | 1.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.22 | 0.84 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.33 | 1.5 |
| Max drawdown | -39.1% | -16.2% |
| Current drawdown | -23.7% | -14.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 45.2% | 36.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.2% | -3.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TSLA or GM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TSLA is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 42 against GM's 40. The edge comes from quality and momentum. GM 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 TSLA or GM the better buy right now?
TSLA carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TSLA over GM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. GM leads Value by 48 points; TSLA leads Quality by 35 points; TSLA leads Momentum by 18 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TSLA or GM?
Analyst price targets imply +14% upside for TSLA and +26.1% for GM, so the Street currently favors GM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TSLA. 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, TSLA or GM?
GM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 48 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, TSLA or GM?
TSLA 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, TSLA or GM?
TSLA 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, TSLA or GM?
TSLA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSLA on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 TSLA more profitable than GM?
TSLA leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 18.9% vs 5.7%; operating margin 4.2% vs 1%; ttm roe 4.6% vs 3%.
Is TSLA's lead over GM getting stronger or weaker?
TSLA lead: Reversed — GM led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; TSLA now leads by 2. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 12 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-20, when TSLA moved ahead of GM.
What would change the TSLA vs GM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: GM closes the Quality gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSLA's edge; GM's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; TSLA 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 TSLA and GM?
TSLA: 0 bullish / 2 bearish. GM: 1 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 TSLA is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On GM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare TSLA and GM 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.