ALB vs INTC Stock Comparison
ALB currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 43 vs 30. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between ALB and INTC?
ALB leads the current stock comparison as Albemarle Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Albemarle Corporation vs Intel Corp.
ALB leads
ALB leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from INTC.
Fragile: 5 of 6 evidence groups support ALB, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Albemarle Corporation
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ALB over INTC, 43 versus 30 as of Oct 21, 2026. ALB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value. ALB also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALB today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. ALB lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ALB now leads by 13.
Compare Albemarle Corporation and Intel Corp. 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 ALB and INTC 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.
- Risk Resilience60 vs 29ALB +31
- Value51 vs 30ALB +21
- Momentum25 vs 21ALB +4
- Quality40 vs 39Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor ALB. ALB’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value.
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 +1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
ALB's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ALB and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ALB (Albemarle Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 46.6% against 30.4%.
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
ALBALB on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ALBALB on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ALBALB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 points.
Momentum
ALBALB on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
ALBALB on Risk Resilience, by 31 points.
Analyst upside
ALBALB on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | ALB | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +108.7% | +18.2% | ALB has more room |
| Target dispersion | +78.6% | +122.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 27 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ALB | 43 vs 30 |
| Fundamentals | ALBon balance | revenue growth 22% vs 18.8%; EPS growth 58.3% vs -195.9%; TTM ROE 2.3% vs -10.8%; gross margin 23.9% vs 38.9% — ALB takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ALB | Value 51 vs 30 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -19.9% vs -9.6%; vs 200-day -37.3% vs 7.8% |
| Risk Resilience | ALB | Risk Resilience 60 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | ALB | Target upside 108.7% vs 18.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ALB and INTC 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 wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 ALB.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20ALB lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ALB now leads by 13.
- Today
- ALB +13
- 43 vs 30
- 7 sessions ago
- ALB +12
- 42 vs 30
- 30 sessions ago
- INTC +3
- 40 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- ALB +14
- 56 vs 42
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Oct 6 when ALB moved ahead of INTC.
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.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only ALB
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (29.51%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only INTC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (20.88%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce, MACD Bearish Crossover.
ALB 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.36%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.39%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1INTC closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALB's edge.
- 2INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3ALB's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 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
ALB leads on balance| Metric | ALB | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 22% | 18.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 58.3% | -195.9% |
| Gross margin | 23.9% | 38.9% |
| Operating margin | 11.9% | 0.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 2.3% | -10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.19 | 0.58 |
Performance
INTC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ALB | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.9% | -10.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -18% | -26% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -18.5% | -10.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -51.7% | 38.4% |
| Year to date | -30.9% | 148.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 0.5% | 148.9% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | ALB | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 21.1 | 16.4 |
| ADX (14) | 39.2 | 23.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -19.9% | -9.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -37.3% | 7.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.4% | 46.6% |
Risk
ALB is the more resilient| Metric | ALB | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.38 | 3.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.27 | 1.5 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.45 | 2.73 |
| Max drawdown | -56.1% | -41.9% |
| Current drawdown | -55.6% | -34.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 56.1% | 77.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.6% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ALB or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ALB is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 43 against INTC's 30. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. 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 ALB or INTC the better buy right now?
ALB carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ALB over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ALB leads Risk Resilience by 31 points; ALB leads Value by 21 points; ALB leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ALB or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply +108.7% upside for ALB and +18.2% for INTC, so the Street currently favors ALB. 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, ALB or INTC?
ALB is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ALB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 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, ALB or INTC?
ALB 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, ALB or INTC?
ALB on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, ALB or INTC?
ALB is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ALB on Risk Resilience, by 31 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 ALB more profitable than INTC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 23.9% vs 38.9%; operating margin 11.9% vs 0.1%; ttm roe 2.3% vs -10.8%. Each name leads on one measure, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is ALB's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
ALB lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ALB now leads by 13. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-06, when ALB moved ahead of INTC.
What would change the ALB vs INTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: INTC closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALB's edge; INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; ALB's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 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 ALB and INTC?
ALB: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. INTC: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. 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 ALB is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ALB and INTC 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.