INTC vs PTEN Stock Comparison
Compare INTC and PTEN across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between INTC and PTEN?
PTEN leads the current stock comparison as Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Intel Corp. vs Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc.
PTEN leads
PTEN leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors INTC on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support PTEN, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Intel Corp.
Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PTEN over INTC, 50 versus 35 as of Sep 6, 2026. PTEN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while INTC holds the stronger quality profile. PTEN 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 PTEN today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. PTEN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Intel Corp. and Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare INTC and PTEN 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%30 vs 61PTEN +31
- Momentum25%40 vs 64PTEN +24
- Risk Resilience15%29 vs 45PTEN +16
- Quality30%39 vs 30INTC +9
4 of 6 evidence groups favor PTEN. PTEN’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; INTC keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
PTEN's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTC and PTEN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PTEN (Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, analyst expectations.
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
PTENPTEN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
PTENPTEN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PTENPTEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 points.
Momentum
PTENPTEN on the Momentum factor, by 24 points.
Lower downside
PTENPTEN on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
INTCINTC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors PTEN, analyst targets favor INTC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | INTC | PTEN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +7.4% | +0.6% | INTC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +136.1% | +48% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 27 | 7 | 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 PTEN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PTEN | 35 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | INTCon balance | revenue growth 18.8% vs 9.9%; EPS growth -195.9% vs 14%; TTM ROE -10.8% vs -2.8%; gross margin 38.9% vs 14.2%; operating margin 0.1% vs -1.1% — INTC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | PTEN | Value 30 vs 61 |
| Technicals | PTEN | Price vs 50-day -4.8% vs 17.1%; vs 200-day 29.2% vs 31.1% |
| Risk Resilience | PTEN | Risk Resilience 29 vs 45 |
| Analyst expectations | INTC | Target upside 7.4% vs 0.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTC and PTEN 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 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (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 PTEN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5PTEN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PTEN +15
- 35 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- PTEN +20
- 34 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- PTEN +13
- 41 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- PTEN +2
- 40 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.
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
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.95%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
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 +4.51%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.04%, 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 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to PTEN's edge.
- 2INTC's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3PTEN'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
INTC leads on balance| Metric | INTC | PTEN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.8% | 9.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -195.9% | 14% |
| Gross margin | 38.9% | 14.2% |
| Operating margin | 0.1% | -1.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -10.8% | -2.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 0.41 |
Performance
INTC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | INTC | PTEN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 7.1% | -0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.8% | 25.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.4% | 7.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 120.6% | 38.5% |
| Year to date | 159.6% | 103.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 299.2% | 125% |
Technicals
PTEN has the stronger structure| Metric | INTC | PTEN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.6 | 52.8 |
| ADX (14) | 14.2 | 26.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.8% | 17.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 29.2% | 31.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 47.7% | 58.8% |
Risk
PTEN is the more resilient| Metric | INTC | PTEN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.91 | -0.13 |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.06 | 1.64 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.84 | 2.58 |
| Max drawdown | -41.9% | -33.4% |
| Current drawdown | -32% | -5.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 79.2% | 52.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -5.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INTC or PTEN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PTEN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 50 against INTC's 35. The edge comes from value and momentum. INTC is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 PTEN the better buy right now?
PTEN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 PTEN over INTC?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. PTEN leads Value by 31 points; PTEN leads Momentum by 24 points; PTEN leads Risk Resilience by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INTC or PTEN?
Analyst price targets imply +7.4% upside for INTC and +0.6% for PTEN, so the Street currently favors INTC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PTEN. 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, INTC or PTEN?
PTEN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PTEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 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 PTEN?
PTEN 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 PTEN?
PTEN on the Momentum factor, by 24 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 PTEN?
PTEN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PTEN on Risk Resilience, by 16 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 PTEN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.9% vs 14.2%; operating margin 0.1% vs -1.1%; ttm roe -10.8% vs -2.8%. INTC leads on two measures and PTEN 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 PTEN's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
PTEN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the INTC vs PTEN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: INTC closes the Value gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to PTEN's edge; INTC's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; PTEN'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 PTEN?
INTC: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. PTEN: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on INTC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PTEN it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare INTC and PTEN 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.