TXN vs ON Stock Comparison
TXN currently leads ON in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 57 vs 46. The clearest difference is quality, while ON has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between TXN and ON?
TXN leads the current stock comparison as Texas Instruments Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Texas Instruments Incorporated vs ON Semiconductor Corporation
TXN leads
TXN leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 17 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors ON on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support TXN, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Texas Instruments Incorporated
ON Semiconductor Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TXN over ON, 57 versus 46 as of Oct 21, 2026. TXN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while ON holds the stronger value profile. TXN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ON. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TXN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. TXN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Texas Instruments Incorporated and ON Semiconductor Corporation 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 TXN and ON 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.
- Quality80 vs 46TXN +34
- Risk Resilience62 vs 35TXN +27
- Value35 vs 58ON +23
- Momentum54 vs 38TXN +16
4 of 6 evidence groups favor TXN. TXN’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; ON 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 +2, 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.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
TXN's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TXN and ON both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TXN (Texas Instruments Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
ON (ON Semiconductor Corporation): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 48.2% against 26.7%.
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
TXNTXN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TXNTXN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ONON on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
TXNTXN on the Momentum factor, by 16 points.
Lower downside
TXNTXN on Risk Resilience, by 27 points.
Analyst upside
ONON on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TXN, analyst targets favor ON. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TXN | ON | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16% | +34.2% | ON has more room |
| Target dispersion | +54.5% | +106.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TXN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TXN | 57 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | TXN | revenue growth 13.2% vs 6%; EPS growth 25.9% vs 8.2%; TTM ROE 35.8% vs 8.4%; gross margin 58.3% vs 37.4%; operating margin 37.3% vs 11.7% |
| Valuation | ON | Value 35 vs 58 |
| Technicals | TXN | Price vs 50-day 4.6% vs 1.7%; vs 200-day 8.8% vs -7.6% |
| Risk Resilience | TXN | Risk Resilience 62 vs 35 |
| Analyst expectations | ON | Target upside 16% vs 34.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TXN and ON 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 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 TXN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TXN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TXN +11
- 57 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- TXN +14
- 59 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- TXN +17
- 66 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- TXN +7
- 55 vs 48
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only TXN
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.57%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
Only ON
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.16%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.70%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bearish Crossover.
TXN 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 +2.47%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.75%, 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.
- 1ON closes the Quality gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to TXN's edge.
- 2ON's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TXN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 6 points over 30 sessions, and a further 11-point move would eliminate TXN'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
TXN leads on balance| Metric | TXN | ON |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.2% | 6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 25.9% | 8.2% |
| Gross margin | 58.3% | 37.4% |
| Operating margin | 37.3% | 11.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 35.8% | 8.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.78 | 0.62 |
Performance
TXN leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | TXN | ON |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.5% | -1.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.3% | 2.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.6% | -18.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 19.1% | -13% |
| Year to date | 60.1% | 39.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 58.3% | 42.8% |
Technicals
TXN has the stronger structure| Metric | TXN | ON |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.8 | 47.9 |
| ADX (14) | 14.1 | 18.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.6% | 1.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8.8% | -7.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.7% | 48.2% |
Risk
TXN is the more resilient| Metric | TXN | ON |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.43 | 2.61 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.18 | 0.84 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.14 | 1.16 |
| Max drawdown | -23.8% | -50.3% |
| Current drawdown | -16.4% | -43.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 42.6% | 62.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TXN or ON?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TXN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 57 against ON's 46. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. ON 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 TXN or ON the better buy right now?
TXN 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 TXN over ON?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TXN leads Quality by 34 points; TXN leads Risk Resilience by 27 points; ON leads Value by 23 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TXN or ON?
Analyst price targets imply +16% upside for TXN and +34.2% for ON, so the Street currently favors ON. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TXN. 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, TXN or ON?
ON is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ON on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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, TXN or ON?
TXN 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, TXN or ON?
TXN on the Momentum factor, by 16 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, TXN or ON?
TXN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TXN on Risk Resilience, by 27 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 TXN more profitable than ON?
TXN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 58.3% vs 37.4%; operating margin 37.3% vs 11.7%; ttm roe 35.8% vs 8.4%.
Is TXN's lead over ON getting stronger or weaker?
TXN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 17 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 not changed hands in that window.
What would change the TXN vs ON verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ON closes the Quality gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to TXN's edge; ON's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TXN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 6 points over 30 sessions, and a further 11-point move would eliminate TXN's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about TXN and ON?
TXN: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. ON: 0 bullish / 3 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 TXN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ON it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare TXN and ON 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.