BEAM vs INTC Stock Comparison
BEAM currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 45 vs 33. The clearest difference is momentum, while INTC has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between BEAM and INTC?
BEAM leads the current stock comparison as Beam Therapeutics Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Beam Therapeutics Inc. vs Intel Corp.
BEAM leads
BEAM leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from INTC.
Fragile: 5 of 6 evidence groups support BEAM, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Beam Therapeutics Inc.
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BEAM over INTC, 45 versus 33 as of Oct 31, 2026. BEAM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while INTC holds the stronger quality profile. BEAM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BEAM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. BEAM lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BEAM now leads by 12.
Compare Beam Therapeutics Inc. 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 BEAM 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.
- Momentum76 vs 34BEAM +42
- Risk Resilience36 vs 28BEAM +8
- Quality35 vs 39INTC +4
- Value34 vs 30BEAM +4
5 of 6 evidence groups favor BEAM. BEAM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; INTC keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +33
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
BEAM's lead widened by 7 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BEAM and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BEAM (Beam Therapeutics Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on quality.
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
BEAMBEAM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BEAMBEAM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BEAMBEAM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
BEAMBEAM on the Momentum factor, by 42 points.
Lower downside
BEAMBEAM on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
BEAMBEAM 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 | BEAM | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +118.5% | +76.7% | BEAM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +68.9% | +107.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 25 | 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 BEAM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BEAM | 45 vs 33 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth -98.5% vs 18.8%; EPS growth -29.7% vs -195.9%; TTM ROE -7.7% vs -10.8%; gross margin 18.9% vs 38.9% |
| Valuation | BEAM | Value 34 vs 30 |
| Technicals | BEAM | Price vs 50-day 4.9% vs -35.3%; vs 200-day 2% vs 10.4% |
| Risk Resilience | BEAM | Risk Resilience 36 vs 28 |
| Analyst expectations | BEAM | Target upside 118.5% vs 76.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BEAM 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 12 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 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 BEAM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28BEAM lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BEAM now leads by 12.
- Today
- BEAM +12
- 45 vs 33
- 7 sessions ago
- BEAM +4
- 35 vs 31
- 30 sessions ago
- INTC +3
- 37 vs 40
- 90 sessions ago
- BEAM +13
- 45 vs 32
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 9 when BEAM 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.
2 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only BEAM
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.68%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only INTC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (17.44%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
BEAM 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 8 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -5.58%, AIQ +8 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -28.58%, AIQ +1 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 Momentum gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to BEAM's edge.
- 2INTC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3BEAM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 | BEAM | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -98.5% | 18.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -29.7% | -195.9% |
| Gross margin | 18.9% | 38.9% |
| Operating margin | -242.3% | 0.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -7.7% | -10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.23 | 0.58 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | BEAM | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 15.9% | 2.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 17.7% | -20.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 8.6% | 4.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -2% | 6.3% |
| Year to date | 3.8% | 158.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 2.9% | 149.6% |
Technicals
BEAM has the stronger structure| Metric | BEAM | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 66 | 36.1 |
| ADX (14) | 11.5 | 25.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.9% | -35.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 2% | 10.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 72.2% | 52.8% |
Risk
BEAM is the more resilient| Metric | BEAM | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.15 | 3.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.41 | 1.41 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.77 | 2.52 |
| Max drawdown | -39.1% | -41.9% |
| Current drawdown | -24.1% | -32.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 72% | 77.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.4% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BEAM or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BEAM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 45 against INTC's 33. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. INTC is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 BEAM or INTC the better buy right now?
BEAM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 BEAM over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BEAM leads Momentum by 42 points; BEAM leads Risk Resilience by 8 points; INTC leads Quality by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BEAM or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply +118.5% upside for BEAM and +76.7% for INTC, so the Street currently favors BEAM. 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, BEAM or INTC?
BEAM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BEAM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 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, BEAM or INTC?
BEAM 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, BEAM or INTC?
BEAM on the Momentum factor, by 42 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, BEAM or INTC?
BEAM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BEAM 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 BEAM more profitable than INTC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 18.9% vs 38.9%; operating margin -242.3% vs 0.1%; ttm roe -7.7% 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 BEAM's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
BEAM lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BEAM now leads by 12. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-09, when BEAM moved ahead of INTC.
What would change the BEAM vs INTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: INTC closes the Momentum gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to BEAM's edge; INTC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; BEAM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 BEAM and INTC?
BEAM: 2 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. INTC: 1 bullish / 1 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 BEAM is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BEAM 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.