GRBK vs INTC Stock Comparison
GRBK currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 50 vs 30. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between GRBK and INTC?
GRBK leads the current stock comparison as Green Brick Partners, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Green Brick Partners, Inc. vs Intel Corp.
GRBK leads
GRBK leads by 20 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, and the lead has widened from 10 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 3 of 5 evidence groups support GRBK, and its lead is widening.
Green Brick Partners, Inc.
Intel Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GRBK over INTC, 50 versus 30 as of Oct 22, 2026. GRBK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value. GRBK also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 5 covered evidence groups favor GRBK today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. GRBK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 20 points over 30 sessions. GRBK 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 Green Brick Partners, 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 GRBK 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.
- Risk Resilience58 vs 29GRBK +29
- Value57 vs 30GRBK +27
- Quality57 vs 39GRBK +18
- Momentum30 vs 21GRBK +9
3 of 5 evidence groups favor GRBK. GRBK’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value.
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 +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
GRBK's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — GRBK and INTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GRBK (Green Brick Partners, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 46.6% against 29.1%.
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
GRBKGRBK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
GRBKGRBK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
GRBKGRBK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 points.
Momentum
GRBKGRBK on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
GRBKGRBK on Risk Resilience, by 29 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 | GRBK | INTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | — | +25.7% | Level |
| Target dispersion | — | +115.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 23 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 5 covered evidence groups favor GRBK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | GRBK | 50 vs 30 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 6.1% vs 18.8%; EPS growth 22.1% vs -195.9%; TTM ROE 15.4% vs -10.8%; gross margin 31.2% vs 38.9% |
| Valuation | GRBK | Value 57 vs 30 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -10.7% vs -9.6%; vs 200-day -11.1% vs 7.8% |
| Risk Resilience | GRBK | Risk Resilience 58 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 GRBK 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 20 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 GRBK.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20GRBK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 20 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GRBK +20
- 50 vs 30
- 7 sessions ago
- GRBK +19
- 49 vs 30
- 30 sessions ago
- GRBK +10
- 53 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- GRBK +12
- 54 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.
0 bullish / 3 bearish
Only GRBK
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.64%)
- 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%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.29%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -2.11%, 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 Risk Resilience gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to GRBK's edge.
- 2INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3GRBK 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
Split| Metric | GRBK | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.1% | 18.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 22.1% | -195.9% |
| Gross margin | 31.2% | 38.9% |
| Operating margin | 19.5% | 0.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 15.4% | -10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.16 | 0.58 |
Performance
INTC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | GRBK | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.5% | -10.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -9.9% | -26% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -13.2% | -10.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -12.6% | 38.4% |
| Year to date | -1.1% | 148.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -7.5% | 148.9% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | GRBK | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.3 | 16.4 |
| ADX (14) | 19.2 | 23.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -10.7% | -9.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -11.1% | 7.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 29.1% | 46.6% |
Risk
GRBK is the more resilient| Metric | GRBK | INTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.9 | 3.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.21 | 1.5 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.39 | 2.73 |
| Max drawdown | -25.4% | -41.9% |
| Current drawdown | -23.1% | -34.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.9% | 77.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.1% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, GRBK or INTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GRBK is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 50 against INTC's 30. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. 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 GRBK or INTC the better buy right now?
GRBK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 3 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 GRBK over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. GRBK leads Risk Resilience by 29 points; GRBK leads Value by 27 points; GRBK leads Quality by 18 points. GRBK 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, GRBK or INTC?
Analyst price targets imply not covered upside for GRBK and +25.7% 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, GRBK or INTC?
GRBK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GRBK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 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, GRBK or INTC?
GRBK 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, GRBK or INTC?
GRBK on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, GRBK or INTC?
GRBK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GRBK on Risk Resilience, by 29 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 GRBK more profitable than INTC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 31.2% vs 38.9%; operating margin 19.5% vs 0.1%; ttm roe 15.4% 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 GRBK's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
GRBK lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 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 GRBK vs INTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: INTC closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to GRBK's edge; INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; GRBK 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 GRBK and INTC?
GRBK: 0 bullish / 3 bearish. 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 GRBK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On INTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare GRBK 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.