FNLC vs INTC Stock Comparison
The First Bancorp, Inc. vs Intel Corp.
FNLC leads
FNLC leads by 22 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 18 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 5 evidence groups support FNLC, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The First Bancorp, Inc.
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors FNLC over INTC, 57 versus 35 as of Sep 5, 2026. FNLC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience. FNLC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 5 covered evidence groups favor FNLC today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. FNLC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 22 points over 30 sessions. FNLC leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare The First Bancorp, Inc. and Intel Corp. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare FNLC 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.
- Value30%59 vs 30FNLC +29
- Risk Resilience15%51 vs 29FNLC +22
- Momentum25%60 vs 40FNLC +20
- Quality30%57 vs 39FNLC +18
4 of 5 evidence groups favor FNLC. FNLC’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.4%)
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No new signals fired.
FNLC's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FNLC and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
FNLC (The First Bancorp, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 47.7% against 19.5%.
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
FNLCFNLC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
FNLCFNLC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
FNLCFNLC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 points.
Momentum
FNLCFNLC on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
FNLCFNLC on Risk Resilience, by 22 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 | FNLC | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | — | +7.6% | Level |
| Target dispersion | — | +135.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | — | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 0 | 27 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 5 covered evidence groups favor FNLC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | FNLC | 57 vs 35 |
| Fundamentals | FNLCon balance | revenue growth 13.7% vs 18.8%; EPS growth 6.2% vs -195.9%; TTM ROE 13.3% vs -10.8%; gross margin 54.4% vs 38.9% — FNLC takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | FNLC | Value 59 vs 30 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day 1% vs -4.8%; vs 200-day 17.9% vs 29.2% |
| Risk Resilience | FNLC | Risk Resilience 51 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 FNLC and INTC and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 22 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 4 of 5 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 FNLC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4FNLC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 22 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- FNLC +22
- 57 vs 35
- 7 sessions ago
- FNLC +24
- 58 vs 34
- 30 sessions ago
- FNLC +18
- 59 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- FNLC +18
- 60 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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (16.66%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium 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
FNLC 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.31%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +4.51%, AIQ +2 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 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to FNLC's edge.
- 2INTC's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3FNLC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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
FNLC leads on balance| Metric | FNLC | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.7% | 18.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 6.2% | -195.9% |
| Gross margin | 54.4% | 38.9% |
| Operating margin | 23.8% | 0.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.3% | -10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.73 | 0.58 |
Performance
INTC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | FNLC | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.1% | 7.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.7% | -5.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 17.9% | -3.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 26.7% | 120.6% |
| Year to date | 32.9% | 159.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 30% | 299.2% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | FNLC | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.6 | 37.6 |
| ADX (14) | 13.2 | 14.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1% | -4.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 17.9% | 29.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 19.5% | 47.7% |
Risk
FNLC is the more resilient| Metric | FNLC | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.27 | 2.91 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.91 | 2.06 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.58 | 3.84 |
| Max drawdown | -12.6% | -41.9% |
| Current drawdown | -1.5% | -32% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.3% | 79.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FNLC or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, FNLC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 57 against INTC's 35. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. 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 FNLC or INTC the better buy right now?
FNLC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor FNLC over INTC?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. FNLC leads Value by 29 points; FNLC leads Risk Resilience by 22 points; FNLC leads Momentum by 20 points. FNLC leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by INTC simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, FNLC or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply not covered upside for FNLC and +7.6% 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, FNLC or INTC?
FNLC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FNLC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 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, FNLC or INTC?
FNLC 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, FNLC or INTC?
FNLC on the Momentum factor, by 20 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, FNLC or INTC?
FNLC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. FNLC on Risk Resilience, by 22 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 FNLC more profitable than INTC?
FNLC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 54.4% vs 38.9%; operating margin 23.8% vs 0.1%; ttm roe 13.3% vs -10.8%.
Is FNLC's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
FNLC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 22 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the FNLC 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 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to FNLC's edge; INTC's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; FNLC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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 FNLC and INTC?
FNLC: 4 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 FNLC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare FNLC 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.