INTC vs ON Stock Comparison
Intel Corp. vs ON Semiconductor Corporation
ON leads
ON leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support ON, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Intel Corp.
ON Semiconductor Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ON over INTC, 43 versus 34 as of Sep 2, 2026. ON's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while INTC holds the stronger momentum profile. ON also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ON today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. ON lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Intel Corp. and ON Semiconductor Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
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%29 vs 55ON +26
- Risk Resilience15%28 vs 37ON +9
- Quality30%39 vs 46ON +7
- Momentum25%37 vs 30INTC +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor ON. ON’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; INTC keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-01, compared against the prior scored session 2026-08-31.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
ON's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTC and ON both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ON (ON Semiconductor Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 59.9% against 41.1%.
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
ONON on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
ONON on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ONON on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 points.
Momentum
INTCINTC on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
ONON on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
ONON 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 | INTC | ON | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +14.2% | +51.1% | ON has more room |
| Target dispersion | +135.8% | +99.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 27 | 9 | 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 ON. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ON | 34 vs 43 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 18.8% vs 6%; EPS growth -195.9% vs 8.2%; ROE -10.8% vs 8.4%; gross margin 38.9% vs 37.4% |
| Valuation | ON | Value 29 vs 55 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -13.2% vs -16.5%; vs 200-day 22.5% vs -4.8% |
| Risk Resilience | ON | Risk Resilience 28 vs 37 |
| Analyst expectations | ON | Target upside 14.2% vs 51.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTC and ON 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 moderate at 9 points.
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 ON.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 20 – Sep 1ON lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ON +9
- 34 vs 43
- 7 sessions ago
- ON +9
- 34 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- ON +8
- 36 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- INTC +2
- 44 vs 42
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jun 26 when INTC moved ahead of ON.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (42.43%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.17%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.19%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.90%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
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 +1.47%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.38%, 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 ON's edge.
- 2INTC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3ON's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
Split| Metric | INTC | ON |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.8% | 6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -195.9% | 8.2% |
| Gross margin | 38.9% | 37.4% |
| Operating margin | 0.1% | 11.7% |
| Return on equity | -10.8% | 8.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 0.62 |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | INTC | ON |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.8 | 35.2 |
| ADX (14) | 15.6 | 30.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -13.2% | -16.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 22.5% | -4.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 59.9% | 41.1% |
Risk
ON is the more resilient| Metric | INTC | ON |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.93 | 2.57 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.96 | 0.87 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.66 | 1.2 |
| Max drawdown | -41.9% | -46.3% |
| Current drawdown | -36.5% | -44.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 79.2% | 61.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -4.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INTC or ON?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ON is the stronger of the two as of Sep 2, 2026, scoring 43 against INTC's 34. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. INTC is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 INTC or ON the better buy right now?
ON carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 2, 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 ON over INTC?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. ON leads Value by 26 points; ON leads Risk Resilience by 9 points; ON leads Quality by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INTC or ON?
Analyst price targets imply +14.2% upside for INTC and +51.1% for ON, so the Street currently favors ON. 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, INTC or ON?
ON is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ON 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, INTC or ON?
ON 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, INTC or ON?
INTC on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, INTC or ON?
ON is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ON on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 INTC more profitable than ON?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.9% vs 37.4%; operating margin 0.1% vs 11.7%; roe -10.8% vs 8.4%. 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 ON's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
ON lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-20 and 2026-09-01. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-06-26, when INTC moved ahead of ON.
What would change the INTC vs ON 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 ON's edge; INTC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; ON's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 INTC and ON?
INTC: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. ON: 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 INTC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ON it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare INTC and ON 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.