TX vs XLK Stock Comparison
Compare TX and XLK across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between TX and XLK?
TX leads the current stock comparison as Ternium S.A., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Ternium S.A. vs State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF
TX leads
TX leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience.
Fragile: 4 of 4 evidence groups support TX, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Ternium S.A.
State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TX over XLK, 63 versus 59 as of Sep 11, 2026. TX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while XLK holds the stronger quality profile. TX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. TX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Ternium S.A. and State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF 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 TX and XLK 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.
- Quality40 vs 74XLK +34
- Value67 vs 36TX +31
- Risk Resilience76 vs 62TX +14
- Momentum78 vs 65TX +13
4 of 4 evidence groups favor TX. TX’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; XLK keeps a meaningful quality 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
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
No new signals fired.
TX's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TX and XLK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TX (Ternium S.A.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
XLK (State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF): the counter-case, on quality.
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
TXTX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
TXTX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 points.
Momentum
TXTX on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
TXTX on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | TX | XLK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -7.6% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | +54.2% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor TX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TX | 63 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | TX | Value 67 vs 36 |
| Technicals | TX | Price vs 50-day 14.3% vs 2.7%; vs 200-day 29.9% vs 15% |
| Risk Resilience | TX | Risk Resilience 76 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TX and XLK 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 4 of 4 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 TX.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TX +4
- 63 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- TX +7
- 63 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- TX +3
- 62 vs 59
- 90 sessions ago
- TX +7
- 50 vs 43
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Jul 3 when XLK moved ahead of TX.
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.
4 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (14.20%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
4 bullish / 0 bearish
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.41%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
TX 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 +0.5%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.32%, AIQ -1 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.
- 1XLK closes the Value gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to TX's edge.
- 2XLK's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3TX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 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
Split| Metric | TX | XLK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.3% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 63.6% | — |
| Gross margin | 17.4% | — |
| Operating margin | 7.5% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 5.8% | — |
| Debt to equity | 0.24 | — |
Performance
TX leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | TX | XLK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.3% | 0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 5% | -1.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 22% | 4.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 44.3% | 31.9% |
| Year to date | 50.9% | 28.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 67.9% | 39.9% |
Technicals
TX has the stronger structure| Metric | TX | XLK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 73.5 | 54.1 |
| ADX (14) | 48.2 | 10.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 14.3% | 2.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 29.9% | 15% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.7% | 20.6% |
Risk
TX is the more resilient| Metric | TX | XLK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.07 | 1.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.75 | 1.25 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.96 | 1.94 |
| Max drawdown | -18.9% | -16.1% |
| Current drawdown | -0.9% | -6.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 31.5% | 26.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3% | -2.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TX or XLK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TX is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 63 against XLK's 59. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. XLK is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 TX or XLK the better buy right now?
TX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TX over XLK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. XLK leads Quality by 34 points; TX leads Value by 31 points; TX leads Risk Resilience by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TX or XLK?
Analyst price targets imply -7.6% upside for TX and not covered for XLK. 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, TX or XLK?
TX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 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, TX or XLK?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, TX or XLK?
TX on the Momentum factor, by 13 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, TX or XLK?
TX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TX on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 TX more profitable than XLK?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is TX's lead over XLK getting stronger or weaker?
TX lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-03, when XLK moved ahead of TX.
What would change the TX vs XLK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: XLK closes the Value gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to TX's edge; XLK's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; TX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; 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 TX and XLK?
TX: 4 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. XLK: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. 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 TX is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On XLK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
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.