EQX vs INTC Stock Comparison
EQX currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 50 vs 30. The clearest difference is value.
What is the main difference between EQX and INTC?
EQX leads the current stock comparison as Equinox Gold Corp., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Equinox Gold Corp. vs Intel Corp.
EQX leads
EQX leads by 20 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support EQX, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Equinox Gold Corp.
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EQX over INTC, 50 versus 30 as of Oct 21, 2026. EQX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality. EQX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EQX today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. EQX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 20 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Equinox Gold Corp. 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 EQX 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.
- Value56 vs 30EQX +26
- Quality60 vs 39EQX +21
- Momentum41 vs 21EQX +20
- Risk Resilience31 vs 29Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor EQX. EQX’s edge is concentrated in value and quality.
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 +2
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
EQX's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — EQX and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EQX (Equinox Gold Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on 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
EQXEQX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EQXEQX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EQXEQX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 points.
Momentum
EQXEQX on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
INTCINTC carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
EQXEQX 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 | EQX | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +22.3% | +18.2% | EQX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +7.4% | +122.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 27 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EQX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | EQX | 50 vs 30 |
| Fundamentals | EQXon balance | revenue growth -10.7% vs 18.8%; EPS growth -25.6% vs -195.9%; TTM ROE 13.7% vs -10.8%; gross margin 39.1% vs 38.9% — EQX takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EQX | Value 56 vs 30 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -7.8% vs -9.6%; vs 200-day -14.5% vs 7.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 31 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | EQX | Target upside 22.3% vs 18.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of EQX and INTC and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 20 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 EQX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20EQX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 20 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- EQX +20
- 50 vs 30
- 7 sessions ago
- EQX +18
- 48 vs 30
- 30 sessions ago
- EQX +4
- 47 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- EQX +15
- 57 vs 42
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only EQX
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.95%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short 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
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
EQX 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 -0.18%, 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 Value gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to EQX's edge.
- 2INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3EQX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
EQX leads on balance| Metric | EQX | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -10.7% | 18.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -25.6% | -195.9% |
| Gross margin | 39.1% | 38.9% |
| Operating margin | 37.9% | 0.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.7% | -10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.09 | 0.58 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | EQX | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.9% | -10.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.3% | -26% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 18.3% | -10.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -21.9% | 38.4% |
| Year to date | -21.2% | 148.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.6% | 148.9% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | EQX | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 49.3 | 16.4 |
| ADX (14) | 13 | 23.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.8% | -9.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -14.5% | 7.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 54.2% | 46.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | EQX | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.01 | 3.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.12 | 1.5 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.19 | 2.73 |
| Max drawdown | -54% | -41.9% |
| Current drawdown | -41% | -34.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 62.6% | 77.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, EQX or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EQX is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 50 against INTC's 30. The edge comes from value and quality. 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 EQX or INTC the better buy right now?
EQX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor EQX over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. EQX leads Value by 26 points; EQX leads Quality by 21 points; EQX leads Momentum by 20 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, EQX or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply +22.3% upside for EQX and +18.2% for INTC, so the Street currently favors EQX. 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, EQX or INTC?
EQX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EQX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 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, EQX or INTC?
EQX 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, EQX or INTC?
EQX on the Momentum factor, by 20 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, EQX 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 EQX more profitable than INTC?
EQX leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 39.1% vs 38.9%; operating margin 37.9% vs 0.1%; ttm roe 13.7% vs -10.8%.
Is EQX's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
EQX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 20 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the EQX vs INTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: INTC closes the Value gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to EQX's edge; INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; EQX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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 EQX and INTC?
EQX: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 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 EQX is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare EQX 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.