TSM vs TTWO Stock Comparison
TSM currently leads TTWO in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 58 vs 44. The clearest difference is quality, while TTWO has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between TSM and TTWO?
TSM leads the current stock comparison as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited vs Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
TSM leads
TSM leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors TTWO on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support TSM.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TSM over TTWO, 58 versus 44 as of Oct 21, 2026. TSM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while TTWO holds the stronger momentum profile. TSM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TTWO. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TSM today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability.
Compare Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited and Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare TSM and TTWO 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.
- Quality98 vs 43TSM +55
- Momentum21 vs 44TTWO +23
- Risk Resilience67 vs 57TSM +10
- Value45 vs 37TSM +8
5 of 6 evidence groups favor TSM. TSM’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; TTWO keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
The central trade-off
TSM (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
TTWO (Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, 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
TSMTSM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TTWOTTWO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TSMTSM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
TTWOTTWO on the Momentum factor, by 23 points.
Lower downside
TSMTSM on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
TTWOTTWO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TSM, analyst targets favor TTWO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TSM | TTWO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +36.4% | +41.4% | TTWO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +34% | +14.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 10 | 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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TSM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TSM | 58 vs 44 |
| Fundamentals | TSMon balance | revenue growth 17.6% vs -8.7%; EPS growth 8% vs 43.8%; TTM ROE 41.2% vs -9.1%; gross margin 65.8% vs 56%; operating margin 57.9% vs -2.4% — TSM takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | TSM | Value 45 vs 37 |
| Technicals | TSM | Price vs 50-day -0.6% vs -5.1%; vs 200-day 7.3% vs -6.8% |
| Risk Resilience | TSM | Risk Resilience 67 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | TTWO | Target upside 36.4% vs 41.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TSM and TTWO 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)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 TSM.
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.
- 1TTWO closes the Quality gap — currently 55 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSM's edge.
- 2TTWO generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3TSM 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
TSM leads on balance| Metric | TSM | TTWO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 17.6% | -8.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 8% | 43.8% |
| Gross margin | 65.8% | 56% |
| Operating margin | 57.9% | -2.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 41.2% | -9.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.14 | 0.82 |
Performance
TSM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | TSM | TTWO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.5% | 3.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6% | 0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.9% | -11.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 15.5% | -5% |
| Year to date | 39.9% | -19.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 41.8% | -20.3% |
Technicals
TSM has the stronger structure| Metric | TSM | TTWO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.7 | 49.1 |
| ADX (14) | 21.6 | 16.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.6% | -5.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7.3% | -6.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.8% | 29.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TSM or TTWO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TSM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 58 against TTWO's 44. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. TTWO is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 TSM or TTWO the better buy right now?
TSM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 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 TSM over TTWO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TSM leads Quality by 55 points; TTWO leads Momentum by 23 points; TSM leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TSM or TTWO?
Analyst price targets imply +36.4% upside for TSM and +41.4% for TTWO, so the Street currently favors TTWO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TSM. 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, TSM or TTWO?
TSM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TSM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 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, TSM or TTWO?
TTWO 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, TSM or TTWO?
TTWO on the Momentum factor, by 23 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, TSM or TTWO?
TSM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TSM on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 TSM more profitable than TTWO?
TSM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 65.8% vs 56%; operating margin 57.9% vs -2.4%; ttm roe 41.2% vs -9.1%.
What would change the TSM vs TTWO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TTWO closes the Quality gap — currently 55 points behind, the largest single contributor to TSM's edge; TTWO generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; TSM 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.
Compare TSM and TTWO 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.