The simple answer is no, because there are two of them .
two items are both similar and different...similar because they are both objects of comparison...and different because there are two.
But it gets worse. From a materialistic point of view, a time lapse allows exchange of atoms from "an object" with its surroundings, so that two instances
of the object could be deemed dissimilar.
So if instead of considering "material existence" per se, we say "things" are a function of "observer states" (and vice versa) we could argue that "identity" is "functional equivalence" with respect to the outcomes of those interactions between observer and world. That is, we have "observation events" as part of a stream of events.
A celebrated example in philosophy is consideration of the planet Venus which prior to more careful astronomic observations was thought to be "two separate objects" (the morning star and the evening star). On my functional definition the original historical observation events were indeed not identical, even if later astronomical findings changed subsequent observer states to give "functional equivalence". In other words, it is meaningless now
to say they were really
the same "object" all the time because that seperates "things" from their "thingers" as part of a paradigmatic progression.
Considering "observer states" of course leads to the interesting scenario of questioning the the integrity of "self". In other words is self1 at time 1 identical to self2 at time 2. Lawyers often resort to such a distinction in pleading "mitigating circumstances".