At a Glance: The Q·Score
JPM edges out GS with a Q·Score of 7.3 ("Bullish") versus GS's 7.1 ("Bullish"). The 0.2-point gap is narrow — both stocks sit comfortably in the same label band — which means the comparison is less about a clear winner and more about understanding where each firm's strengths and weaknesses diverge beneath a broadly similar overall rating. Gaps of this size typically signal that the two stocks are genuinely competitive across most dimensions, with the outcome hinging on a handful of specific metrics.
Quality — Profitability and Capital Efficiency
The data gives the edge to JPM on Quality. JPM's net profit margin — the percentage of revenue that survives all costs and taxes to become actual profit — stands at 34.9%, compared with GS's 31.0%. Both are strong by any standard, but JPM's near-35-cent profit on every dollar of revenue reflects the breadth and diversification of its business lines. Return on equity (ROE), which measures how efficiently a company generates profit from shareholders' capital, is close but again favours JPM: 17.8% versus GS's 17.0%. Neither figure is available for free cash flow yield in the supplied data, but on the two reported Quality metrics, JPM holds a consistent, if modest, lead.
Health — Balance Sheet and Execution
JPM also leads on Health, with the most telling data point being EPS beat rate — the proportion of recent quarters in which a company's reported earnings per share exceeded analyst expectations. JPM's beat rate of 75% is solid, reflecting consistent execution against forecasts. GS, however, posts a remarkable 100% EPS beat rate, meaning it has beaten analyst estimates in every tracked quarter in the dataset. That figure alone is striking and worth noting as a counterpoint: while JPM leads the Health dimension overall based on the composite Q·Score calculation, GS's perfect beat rate suggests a management team that either guides conservatively or consistently outperforms expectations — a meaningful signal of operational discipline.
Growth — Revenue, Earnings, and Surprise
This dimension belongs decisively to GS. Goldman's revenue growth of 42.5% outpaces JPM's already-impressive 30.4%, and the earnings growth gap is even wider: GS at 92.3% versus JPM at 46.9%. To put those numbers in context, double-digit revenue growth is uncommon in large-cap financial services, where mature balance sheets and regulatory constraints typically moderate expansion — so both figures are well above sector norms. GS's near-doubling of earnings in the measured period reflects the cyclical rebound in investment banking and trading revenues that has characterised the firm's recent results. JPM's 46.9% earnings growth is itself a strong number; it simply looks measured beside GS's pace. The data gives the Growth edge clearly to GS.
Valuation — Price Relative to Fundamentals
JPM leads on Valuation. The forward P/E — calculated by dividing the current stock price by projected earnings per share for the coming year — is 14.2x for JPM versus 16.3x for GS. In the Financial Services sector, where large-cap banks have historically traded in the 10x–15x forward P/E range, JPM sits at the upper end of that conventional band while GS trades at a modest premium to it. The analyst consensus price target implies an upside of 5.2% from JPM's current price of $346.91, while GS's consensus target sits 5.4% below its current price of $1,152.07 — meaning the average analyst covering GS sees the stock as already trading above where they expect it to be in the near term. JPM's position within its 52-week range and its lower forward multiple combine to give it the Valuation edge in this comparison.
Sentiment — Analyst Consensus
JPM leads on Sentiment by a meaningful margin. Among the 21 analysts covering JPM, 50% carry a positive rating on the stock. GS, covered by 20 analysts, sees only 28% with a positive rating — a notably lower proportion for a firm that is simultaneously posting some of the strongest growth numbers in the comparison. That divergence is one of the more interesting tensions in this dataset: GS's earnings growth of 92.3% and perfect EPS beat rate would typically attract strong analyst enthusiasm, yet fewer than one in three covering analysts holds a positive view, and the consensus price target sits below the current market price. This may reflect valuation concerns at GS's current price level, or expectations that the recent growth pace is unlikely to be sustained — though the data provided does not specify the reason. JPM's 50% positive rating ratio, combined with a price target implying positive upside, gives it a cleaner Sentiment profile.
What the Data Shows
JPM holds the higher Q·Score at 7.3 versus GS's 7.1, with the gap driven primarily by JPM's advantages in Valuation and Sentiment — two dimensions where GS's strong fundamental momentum has not translated into analyst enthusiasm or a price target above the current market price. The Growth dimension is GS's clearest strength, with revenue and earnings expansion rates that significantly outpace JPM's, and the Quality and Health dimensions are closely contested, with GS's perfect EPS beat rate standing out as a notable data point even where JPM leads the composite. Across all five dimensions, the two stocks are more similar than different — the Q·Score reflects that, with both landing in the same "Bullish" band separated by just 0.2 points.
Explore the Full Comparison
The live, interactive breakdown — updated in real time — is available at quantify.biz/compare/gs-vs-jpm.