CLSK vs INTC Stock Comparison
INTC currently leads CLSK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 30 vs 21. The clearest difference is quality, while CLSK has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between CLSK and INTC?
INTC leads the current stock comparison as Intel Corp., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
CleanSpark, Inc. vs Intel Corp.
INTC leads
INTC leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 12 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CLSK on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support INTC, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
CleanSpark, Inc.
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors INTC over CLSK, 30 versus 21 as of Oct 21, 2026. INTC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while CLSK holds the stronger value profile. INTC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CLSK. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INTC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. INTC lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare CleanSpark, 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 CLSK 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.
- Quality0 vs 39INTC +39
- Value38 vs 30CLSK +8
- Momentum24 vs 21Even
- Risk Resilience27 vs 29Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor INTC. INTC’s edge is concentrated in quality; CLSK keeps a meaningful value 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.
New signals
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (1.0%)
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
INTC's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CLSK and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
INTC (Intel Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
CLSK (CleanSpark, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 52.6% against 46.6%.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
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
INTCINTC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CLSKCLSK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CLSKCLSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
INTCINTC carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
CLSKCLSK on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors INTC, analyst targets favor CLSK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CLSK | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +151.4% | +18.2% | CLSK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +36.4% | +122.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 27 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INTC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | INTC | 21 vs 30 |
| Fundamentals | INTCon balance | revenue growth 1.2% vs 18.8%; EPS growth 41.4% vs -195.9%; TTM ROE -75.2% vs -10.8%; gross margin -5.3% vs 38.9% — INTC takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CLSK | Value 38 vs 30 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -28% vs -9.6%; vs 200-day -32.6% vs 7.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 27 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | CLSK | Target upside 151.4% vs 18.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CLSK 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 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 INTC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20INTC lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- INTC +9
- 21 vs 30
- 7 sessions ago
- INTC +8
- 22 vs 30
- 30 sessions ago
- INTC +12
- 31 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- INTC +12
- 30 vs 42
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 4 when INTC moved ahead of CLSK.
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 / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CLSK
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.98%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (1.0%)
- 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%)
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, Keltner Channel Breakdown, RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce, MACD Bearish Crossover.
INTC 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 +3.8%, 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.
- 1CLSK closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to INTC's edge.
- 2CLSK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3INTC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 9-point move would eliminate INTC's advantage entirely.
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
INTC leads on balance| Metric | CLSK | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.2% | 18.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 41.4% | -195.9% |
| Gross margin | -5.3% | 38.9% |
| Operating margin | -79.4% | 0.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -75.2% | -10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 2.34 | 0.58 |
Performance
INTC leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CLSK | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -16.9% | -10.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -44.3% | -26% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -43.8% | -10.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -26.8% | 38.4% |
| Year to date | -16.7% | 148.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -57.8% | 148.9% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | CLSK | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 7.7 | 16.4 |
| ADX (14) | 30.3 | 23.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -28% | -9.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -32.6% | 7.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 52.6% | 46.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CLSK | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.61 | 3.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.51 | 1.5 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.95 | 2.73 |
| Max drawdown | -59.9% | -41.9% |
| Current drawdown | -58.7% | -34.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 91.4% | 77.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -8.3% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CLSK or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, INTC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 30 against CLSK's 21. The edge comes from quality. CLSK is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 CLSK or INTC the better buy right now?
INTC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor INTC over CLSK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. INTC leads Quality by 39 points; CLSK leads Value by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CLSK or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply +151.4% upside for CLSK and +18.2% for INTC, so the Street currently favors CLSK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors INTC. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, CLSK or INTC?
CLSK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CLSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 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, CLSK or INTC?
CLSK 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, CLSK or INTC?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, CLSK or INTC?
INTC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. INTC carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is CLSK more profitable than INTC?
INTC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin -5.3% vs 38.9%; operating margin -79.4% vs 0.1%; ttm roe -75.2% vs -10.8%.
Is INTC's lead over CLSK getting stronger or weaker?
INTC lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-04, when INTC moved ahead of CLSK.
What would change the CLSK vs INTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CLSK closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to INTC's edge; CLSK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; INTC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 9-point move would eliminate INTC's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about CLSK and INTC?
CLSK: 1 bullish / 5 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 CLSK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CLSK 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.