TSN vs UL Stock Comparison
Compare TSN and UL across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between TSN and UL?
UL leads the current stock comparison as Unilever PLC, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Tyson Foods, Inc. vs Unilever PLC
UL leads
UL leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 2 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors TSN on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support UL, and its lead is widening.
Tyson Foods, Inc.
Unilever PLC
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors UL over TSN, 46 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. UL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while TSN holds the stronger value profile. UL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TSN. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor UL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. UL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Tyson Foods, Inc. and Unilever PLC 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 TSN and UL 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.
- Quality29 vs 66UL +37
- Value64 vs 35TSN +29
- Momentum24 vs 30UL +6
- Risk Resilience50 vs 53Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor UL. UL’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; TSN keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -7
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
UL's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TSN and UL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
UL (Unilever PLC): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
TSN (Tyson Foods, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 32.8% against 17.8%.
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
ULUL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ULUL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TSNTSN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 points.
Momentum
ULUL on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
ULUL carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
TSNTSN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors UL, analyst targets favor TSN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TSN | UL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +32.7% | +14.5% | TSN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +24.2% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 1 | 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 UL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | UL | 41 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | UL | revenue growth 1.6% vs 29.2%; EPS growth -29.3% vs 21.4%; TTM ROE 3.2% vs 35.4%; gross margin 6.2% vs 99%; operating margin 2.5% vs 27.1% |
| Valuation | TSN | Value 64 vs 35 |
| Technicals | UL | Price vs 50-day -7.4% vs -1.5%; vs 200-day -13.2% vs -2.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 50 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | TSN | Target upside 32.7% vs 14.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TSN and UL 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 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 UL.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10UL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- UL +5
- 41 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- UL +17
- 41 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- UL +2
- 47 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- UL +8
- 48 vs 56
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Jul 31 when UL moved ahead of TSN.
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.
1 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (5.62%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.03%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
TSN 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 +0.99%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.63%, 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.
- 1TSN closes the Quality gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to UL's edge.
- 2TSN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3UL 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
UL leads on balance| Metric | TSN | UL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.6% | 29.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -29.3% | 21.4% |
| Gross margin | 6.2% | 99% |
| Operating margin | 2.5% | 27.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 3.2% | 35.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.44 | 1.98 |
Performance
UL leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | TSN | UL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6% | -4.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6% | -0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -6.5% | 5.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -12.3% | -5.4% |
| Year to date | -10.5% | -5.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -6.2% | -14.4% |
Technicals
UL has the stronger structure| Metric | TSN | UL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 22.7 | 37.9 |
| ADX (14) | 20.9 | 15.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.4% | -1.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -13.2% | -2.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.8% | 17.8% |
Risk
Split| Metric | TSN | UL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.06 | 0.02 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.25 | -0.63 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.39 | -0.98 |
| Max drawdown | -25.2% | -26.2% |
| Current drawdown | -23.7% | -17.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.6% | 24.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.2% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TSN or UL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, UL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 46 against TSN's 41. The edge comes from quality and momentum. TSN 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 TSN or UL the better buy right now?
UL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor UL over TSN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. UL leads Quality by 37 points; TSN leads Value by 29 points; UL leads Momentum by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TSN or UL?
Analyst price targets imply +32.7% upside for TSN and +14.5% for UL, so the Street currently favors TSN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors UL. 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, TSN or UL?
TSN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TSN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 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, TSN or UL?
UL 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, TSN or UL?
UL on the Momentum factor, by 6 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, TSN or UL?
UL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. UL carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is TSN more profitable than UL?
UL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 6.2% vs 99%; operating margin 2.5% vs 27.1%; ttm roe 3.2% vs 35.4%.
Is UL's lead over TSN getting stronger or weaker?
UL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 5 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-31, when UL moved ahead of TSN.
What would change the TSN vs UL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TSN closes the Quality gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to UL's edge; TSN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; UL 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 TSN and UL?
TSN: 1 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted. UL: 0 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 TSN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On UL it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare TSN and UL 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.