INTC vs XYL Stock Comparison
XYL currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 47 vs 33. The clearest difference is value, while INTC has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between INTC and XYL?
XYL leads the current stock comparison as Xylem Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Intel Corp. vs Xylem Inc.
XYL leads
XYL leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 18 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors INTC on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support XYL, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors XYL over INTC, 47 versus 33 as of Oct 31, 2026. XYL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while INTC holds the stronger momentum profile. XYL 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 XYL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. XYL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Intel Corp. and Xylem Inc. 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 INTC and XYL 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 vs 59XYL +29
- Risk Resilience28 vs 56XYL +28
- Quality39 vs 52XYL +13
- Momentum34 vs 22INTC +12
4 of 6 evidence groups favor XYL. XYL’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; INTC keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
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 7 active signals are unchanged.
XYL's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTC and XYL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
XYL (Xylem Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 52.8% against 42.8%.
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
XYLXYL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
XYLXYL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
XYLXYL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 points.
Momentum
INTCINTC on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
XYLXYL on Risk Resilience, by 28 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 XYL, analyst targets favor INTC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | INTC | XYL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +76.7% | +56.9% | INTC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +107.6% | +36.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 25 | 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 XYL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | XYL | 33 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | XYLon balance | revenue growth 18.8% vs 9.9%; EPS growth -195.9% vs 40.5%; TTM ROE -10.8% vs 9.2%; gross margin 38.9% vs 39.2% — XYL takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | XYL | Value 30 vs 59 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -35.3% vs -12.8%; vs 200-day 10.4% vs -21.2% |
| Risk Resilience | XYL | Risk Resilience 28 vs 56 |
| Analyst expectations | INTC | Target upside 76.7% vs 56.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTC and XYL and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 XYL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30XYL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- XYL +14
- 33 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- XYL +32
- 31 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- XYL +18
- 34 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- XYL +15
- 34 vs 49
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.
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only INTC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (17.44%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.58%)
2 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted
Only XYL
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.16%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bearish Crossover.
XYL 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -28.58%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.81%, 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 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to XYL's edge.
- 2INTC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3XYL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 14-point move would eliminate XYL's advantage entirely.
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
XYL leads on balance| Metric | INTC | XYL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.8% | 9.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -195.9% | 40.5% |
| Gross margin | 38.9% | 39.2% |
| Operating margin | 0.1% | 14.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -10.8% | 9.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 0.29 |
Performance
INTC leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | INTC | XYL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.8% | -9.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -20.5% | -12.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.8% | -20% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.3% | -23.5% |
| Year to date | 158.9% | -25.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 149.6% | -38.5% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | INTC | XYL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.1 | 26.8 |
| ADX (14) | 25.5 | 25.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -35.3% | -12.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 10.4% | -21.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 52.8% | 42.8% |
Risk
XYL is the more resilient| Metric | INTC | XYL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.08 | 0.67 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.41 | -1.8 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.52 | -1.97 |
| Max drawdown | -41.9% | -42.3% |
| Current drawdown | -32.2% | -42.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 77.9% | 29.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INTC or XYL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, XYL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 47 against INTC's 33. 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 XYL the better buy right now?
XYL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor XYL over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. XYL leads Value by 29 points; XYL leads Risk Resilience by 28 points; XYL leads Quality by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INTC or XYL?
Analyst price targets imply +76.7% upside for INTC and +56.9% for XYL, so the Street currently favors INTC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors XYL. 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 XYL?
XYL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. XYL 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, INTC or XYL?
XYL 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 XYL?
INTC on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, INTC or XYL?
XYL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. XYL on Risk Resilience, by 28 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 INTC more profitable than XYL?
XYL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 38.9% vs 39.2%; operating margin 0.1% vs 14.5%; ttm roe -10.8% vs 9.2%.
Is XYL's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
XYL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the INTC vs XYL 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 XYL's edge; INTC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; XYL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 14-point move would eliminate XYL's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about INTC and XYL?
INTC: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. XYL: 2 bullish / 5 bearish, 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 INTC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On XYL it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare INTC and XYL 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.