GNRC vs INTC Stock Comparison
GNRC currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 43 vs 31. The clearest difference is value.
What is the main difference between GNRC and INTC?
GNRC leads the current stock comparison as Generac Holdings Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Generac Holdings Inc. vs Intel Corp.
GNRC leads
GNRC leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors INTC on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support GNRC.
Generac Holdings Inc.
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GNRC over INTC, 43 versus 31 as of Nov 7, 2026. GNRC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum. GNRC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors INTC. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GNRC today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. GNRC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Generac Holdings 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 GNRC 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.
- Value51 vs 34GNRC +17
- Momentum28 vs 15GNRC +13
- Quality52 vs 42GNRC +10
- Risk Resilience33 vs 33Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor GNRC. GNRC’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-11-06, compared against the prior scored session 2026-11-05.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
GNRC's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — GNRC and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GNRC (Generac Holdings Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 121.5% against 68.6%.
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
GNRCGNRC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
GNRCGNRC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
GNRCGNRC on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
GNRCGNRC carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
INTCINTC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors GNRC, analyst targets favor INTC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | GNRC | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +68.8% | +102% | INTC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +54% | +114.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 28 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GNRC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | GNRC | 43 vs 31 |
| Fundamentals | GNRC | TTM ROE 10.8% vs -11.2%; gross margin 39.9% vs 40.2%; operating margin 10.4% vs 3.2% |
| Valuation | GNRC | Value 51 vs 34 |
| Technicals | GNRC | Price vs 50-day -10.6% vs -42.5%; vs 200-day -19% vs -35.1% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 33 vs 33 |
| Analyst expectations | INTC | Target upside 68.8% vs 102% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of GNRC 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 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 GNRC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 8 – Nov 6GNRC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GNRC +12
- 43 vs 31
- 7 sessions ago
- GNRC +11
- 43 vs 32
- 30 sessions ago
- GNRC +14
- 44 vs 30
- 90 sessions ago
- GNRC +7
- 42 vs 35
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Sep 17 when GNRC 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.
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
Only GNRC
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (10.79%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only INTC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.53%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bearish Crossover.
INTC is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 +2.58%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +7.71%, 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 Value gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to GNRC's edge.
- 2INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3GNRC starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
GNRC leads on balance| Metric | GNRC | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Gross margin | 39.9% | 40.2% |
| Operating margin | 10.4% | 3.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.8% | -11.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.44 | 0.44 |
Performance
GNRC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | GNRC | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -10.7% | -14.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -21.4% | -46.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.2% | -41.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -30% | -49.1% |
| Year to date | 29.6% | 52.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 11.1% | 46.6% |
Technicals
GNRC has the stronger structure| Metric | GNRC | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 41.8 | 23.6 |
| ADX (14) | 23.2 | 37.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -10.6% | -42.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -19% | -35.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 68.6% | 121.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | GNRC | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.06 | 3.19 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.46 | 0.87 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.75 | 1.28 |
| Max drawdown | -41.7% | -62.9% |
| Current drawdown | -40.2% | -60.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 58.8% | 84.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -6.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, GNRC or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GNRC is the stronger of the two as of Nov 7, 2026, scoring 43 against INTC's 31. The edge comes from value and momentum. 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 GNRC or INTC the better buy right now?
GNRC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Nov 7, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 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 GNRC over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. GNRC leads Value by 17 points; GNRC leads Momentum by 13 points; GNRC leads Quality by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, GNRC or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply +68.8% upside for GNRC and +102% for INTC, so the Street currently favors INTC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors GNRC. 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, GNRC or INTC?
GNRC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GNRC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 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, GNRC 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, GNRC or INTC?
GNRC on the Momentum factor, by 13 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, GNRC or INTC?
GNRC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GNRC 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 GNRC more profitable than INTC?
GNRC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 39.9% vs 40.2%; operating margin 10.4% vs 3.2%; ttm roe 10.8% vs -11.2%.
Is GNRC's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
GNRC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-08 and 2026-11-06. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-17, when GNRC moved ahead of INTC.
What would change the GNRC 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 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to GNRC's edge; INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; GNRC starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 GNRC and INTC?
GNRC: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 GNRC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare GNRC 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.