BAI vs INTC Stock Comparison
BAI currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 39 vs 30. The clearest difference is quality, while INTC has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between BAI and INTC?
BAI leads the current stock comparison as iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF vs Intel Corp.
BAI leads
BAI leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 1 of 4 evidence groups support BAI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BAI over INTC, 39 versus 30 as of Oct 21, 2026. BAI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while INTC holds the stronger risk resilience profile. BAI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 4 covered evidence groups favor BAI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 1 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. BAI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF 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 BAI 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.
- Quality64 vs 39BAI +25
- Momentum30 vs 21BAI +9
- Risk Resilience21 vs 29INTC +8
- Value29 vs 30Even
1 of 4 evidence groups favor BAI. BAI’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; INTC keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
BAI's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BAI and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BAI (iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 46.6% against 33.7%.
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
BAIBAI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
BAIBAI on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
INTCINTC on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | BAI | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | — | +18.2% | Level |
| Target dispersion | — | +122.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | — | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | — | 27 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 4 covered evidence groups favor BAI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BAI | 39 vs 30 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Even | Value 29 vs 30 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -5.5% vs -9.6%; vs 200-day 0.4% vs 7.8% |
| Risk Resilience | INTC | Risk Resilience 21 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BAI 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 moderate at 9 points.
- Only 1 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 BAI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20BAI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BAI +9
- 39 vs 30
- 7 sessions ago
- BAI +9
- 39 vs 30
- 30 sessions ago
- BAI +6
- 49 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- BAI +7
- 49 vs 42
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Sep 17 when BAI 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, conflicted
Only BAI
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only INTC
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.29%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, Keltner Channel Breakdown, MACD Bearish Crossover.
BAI 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 +1.88%, AIQ 0 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 Quality gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to BAI's edge.
- 2INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3BAI'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
Split| Metric | BAI | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | — | 18.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | — | -195.9% |
| Gross margin | — | 38.9% |
| Operating margin | — | 0.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | — | -10.8% |
| Debt to equity | — | 0.58 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | BAI | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -9% | -10.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -11.6% | -26% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7% | -10.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 4.2% | 38.4% |
| Year to date | 26.4% | 148.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 20.2% | 148.9% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | BAI | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 30.9 | 16.4 |
| ADX (14) | 23.1 | 23.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.5% | -9.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.4% | 7.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 33.7% | 46.6% |
Risk
INTC is the more resilient| Metric | BAI | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.66 | 3.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.56 | 1.5 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.82 | 2.73 |
| Max drawdown | -30.9% | -41.9% |
| Current drawdown | -22.4% | -34.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 44.5% | 77.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BAI or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BAI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 39 against INTC's 30. The edge comes from quality and momentum. INTC is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 BAI or INTC the better buy right now?
BAI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 1 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BAI over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BAI leads Quality by 25 points; BAI leads Momentum by 9 points; INTC leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BAI or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply not covered upside for BAI and +18.2% for INTC. 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, BAI 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, BAI or INTC?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, BAI or INTC?
BAI on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, BAI or INTC?
INTC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. INTC on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 BAI more profitable than INTC?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is BAI's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
BAI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-17, when BAI moved ahead of INTC.
What would change the BAI 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 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to BAI's edge; INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; BAI'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 BAI and INTC?
BAI: 1 bullish / 3 bearish, 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 BAI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
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.