ALGM vs INTC Stock Comparison
Compare ALGM and INTC across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ALGM and INTC?
ALGM leads the current stock comparison as Allegro MicroSystems, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Allegro MicroSystems, Inc. vs Intel Corp.
ALGM leads
ALGM leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from INTC.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ALGM, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Allegro MicroSystems, Inc.
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ALGM over INTC, 36 versus 35 as of Sep 6, 2026. ALGM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while INTC holds the stronger momentum profile. ALGM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALGM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. ALGM lead: Reversed — INTC led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ALGM now leads by 1.
Compare Allegro MicroSystems, Inc. and Intel Corp. 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 ALGM 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.
- Momentum25%25 vs 40INTC +15
- Quality30%48 vs 39ALGM +9
- Risk Resilience15%37 vs 29ALGM +8
- Value30%33 vs 30Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ALGM. ALGM’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; INTC keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
ALGM's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ALGM and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ALGM (Allegro MicroSystems, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals.
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
ALGMALGM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
ALGMALGM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
INTCINTC on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
ALGMALGM on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
ALGMALGM 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 | ALGM | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +52.6% | +7.4% | ALGM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +34% | +136.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 27 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALGM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 36 vs 35 |
| Fundamentals | ALGMon balance | revenue growth 6.6% vs 18.8%; EPS growth 201.1% vs -195.9%; TTM ROE 1.5% vs -10.8%; gross margin 47.2% vs 38.9% — ALGM takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 33 vs 30 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -19.6% vs -4.8%; vs 200-day -7.1% vs 29.2% |
| Risk Resilience | ALGM | Risk Resilience 37 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | ALGM | Target upside 52.6% vs 7.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ALGM 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 narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 ALGM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5ALGM lead: Reversed — INTC led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ALGM now leads by 1.
- Today
- ALGM +1
- 36 vs 35
- 7 sessions ago
- ALGM +1
- 35 vs 34
- 30 sessions ago
- INTC +2
- 39 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- ALGM +6
- 46 vs 40
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on May 20 when INTC moved ahead of ALGM.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (15.51%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (35.67%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.34%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
ALGM 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 +2.95%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +4.51%, 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 Quality gap — currently 9 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALGM's edge.
- 2INTC's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3ALGM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
ALGM leads on balance| Metric | ALGM | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.6% | 18.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 201.1% | -195.9% |
| Gross margin | 47.2% | 38.9% |
| Operating margin | 6.2% | 0.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 1.5% | -10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.3 | 0.58 |
Performance
INTC leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | ALGM | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.3% | 7.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -16.4% | -5.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -21.1% | -3.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 14.7% | 120.6% |
| Year to date | 38.8% | 159.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 22.7% | 299.2% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | ALGM | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 26 | 37.6 |
| ADX (14) | 27.5 | 14.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -19.6% | -4.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -7.1% | 29.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 55.8% | 47.7% |
Risk
ALGM is the more resilient| Metric | ALGM | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.9 | 2.91 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.57 | 2.06 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.9 | 3.84 |
| Max drawdown | -49% | -41.9% |
| Current drawdown | -47.4% | -32% |
| Annualized volatility | 66.2% | 79.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ALGM or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ALGM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 36 against INTC's 35. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. INTC is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 ALGM or INTC the better buy right now?
ALGM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ALGM over INTC?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. INTC leads Momentum by 15 points; ALGM leads Quality by 9 points; ALGM leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ALGM or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply +52.6% upside for ALGM and +7.4% for INTC, so the Street currently favors ALGM. 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, ALGM or INTC?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, ALGM or INTC?
ALGM 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, ALGM or INTC?
INTC on the Momentum factor, by 15 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, ALGM or INTC?
ALGM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ALGM on Risk Resilience, by 8 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ALGM more profitable than INTC?
ALGM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 47.2% vs 38.9%; operating margin 6.2% vs 0.1%; ttm roe 1.5% vs -10.8%.
Is ALGM's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
ALGM lead: Reversed — INTC led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ALGM now leads by 1. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-05-20, when INTC moved ahead of ALGM.
What would change the ALGM vs INTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: INTC closes the Quality gap — currently 9 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALGM's edge; INTC's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; ALGM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about ALGM and INTC?
ALGM: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. INTC: 2 bullish / 0 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 ALGM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ALGM and INTC with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.