INTC vs LHX Stock Comparison

Compare INTC and LHX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.

Market data as of Sep 11, 2026 market close· AIQ score gap 1 points
INTC
Technology
vs
LHX
Industrials
INTC
Intel Corp.
Price
$103
Day move
+2.61%
AIQ Score
44/100
Best edge
Momentum
Sector
Technology
LHX
L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
Leads
Price
$246
Day move
-1.14%
AIQ Score
45/100
Best edge
Risk Resilience
Sector
Industrials

What is the main difference between INTC and LHX?

LHX leads the current stock comparison as L3Harris Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Intel Corp. vs L3Harris Technologies, Inc.

Data as of Sep 11, 2026· market close· Cross-sector · Technology vs Industrials· Coverage 66/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 3/10

LHX leads

LHX leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 14 points over 30 sessions.

Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support LHX, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 3 of 6Comparison trend: Weakening
INTC

Intel Corp.

AIQ Score
44/100
AIQ Edge Score
3/10
LHX

L3Harris Technologies, Inc.

Leads
AIQ Score
45/100
AIQ Edge Score
5/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LHX over INTC, 45 versus 44 as of Sep 11, 2026. LHX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while INTC holds the stronger momentum profile. LHX also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LHX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. LHX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 1 points over 30 sessions.

Compare Intel Corp. and L3Harris Technologies, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Price-return comparison using available daily close history.

INTC
+82.4%
LHX
+8.7%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000

INTC $18,243 · LHX $10,869

Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.

Compare INTC and LHX against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

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.

INTC advantage
0
LHX advantage
  • Momentum77 vs 21
    INTC +56
  • Risk Resilience28 vs 60
    LHX +32
  • Value30 vs 58
    LHX +28
  • Quality39 vs 43
    LHX +4

3 of 6 evidence groups favor LHX. LHX’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; INTC keeps a meaningful momentum edge.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.

INTC-2 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -8

New signals

  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish bullish, trend, medium horizon
LHX0 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -1

No new signals fired.

The lead changed hands: LHX moved ahead of INTC in the latest snapshot.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTC and LHX both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

LHX (L3Harris Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.

INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 58.9% against 21.7%.

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

LHX

LHX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.

Growth

LHX

LHX on combined revenue and EPS growth.

Value

LHX

LHX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 points.

Momentum

INTC

INTC on the Momentum factor, by 56 points.

Lower downside

LHX

LHX on Risk Resilience, by 32 points.

Analyst upside

LHX

LHX 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.

MeasureINTCLHXNote
Implied upside to target-0.1%+28.3%LHX has more room
Target dispersion+136.1%0%Lower is tighter analyst agreement
ConsensusHoldBuyContext, not a primary driver
Analysts covering271Higher coverage generally improves confidence

Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LHX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreEven44 vs 45
FundamentalsEvenrevenue growth 18.8% vs 2.4%; EPS growth -195.9% vs 15%; TTM ROE -10.8% vs 9.4%; gross margin 38.9% vs 25.5%
ValuationLHXValue 30 vs 58
TechnicalsINTCPrice vs 50-day 4.2% vs -12.4%; vs 200-day 33.4% vs -20%
Risk ResilienceLHXRisk Resilience 28 vs 60
Analyst expectationsLHXTarget upside -0.1% vs 28.3%

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTC and LHX and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.

  • The AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 LHX.

How the comparison changed

119 daily snapshots · May 4 Sep 10

LHX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 1 points over 30 sessions.

May 4INTC leads above the line · LHX leads belowSep 10
Today
LHX +1
44 vs 45
7 sessions ago
LHX +10
35 vs 45
30 sessions ago
LHX +14
38 vs 52
90 sessions ago
LHX +18
33 vs 51

The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Sep 10 when LHX 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.

INTC

4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral

  • Golden Cross Active bullish, trend, long horizon (31.44%)
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • Uptrend Structure Active bullish, trend, long horizon
LHXConflicted

1 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted

  • Death Cross Active bearish, trend, long horizon (11.86%)
  • Keltner Channel Breakdown bearish, volatility, short horizon
  • RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce bullish, momentum, short horizon

LHX 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.

INTCDivergence

Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.61%, AIQ -2 points).

LHXNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.14%, 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.

  1. 1INTC closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to LHX's edge.
  2. 2INTC's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
  3. 3LHX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once.
  4. 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 13 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate LHX'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

Split
MetricINTCLHX
Revenue growth (YoY)18.8%2.4%
EPS growth (YoY)-195.9%15%
Gross margin38.9%25.5%
Operating margin0.1%10%
Return on equity (TTM)-10.8%9.4%
Debt to equity0.580.53

Performance

INTC leads 6 of 6 windows
MetricINTCLHX
1 week (5 sessions)11.4%-5%
1 month (20 sessions)-0.6%-14.6%
3 months (63 sessions)-6.3%-18%
6 months (126 sessions)109.1%-30.8%
Year to date171.9%-12.5%
1 year (252 sessions)309.8%-8.6%

Technicals

INTC has the stronger structure
MetricINTCLHX
RSI (14)61.317.4
ADX (14)15.536
Price vs 50-day4.2%-12.4%
Price vs 200-day33.4%-20%
Volatility (1M, annualized)58.9%21.7%

Risk

LHX is the more resilient
MetricINTCLHX
Beta2.890.32
Sharpe ratio2.12-0.29
Sortino ratio3.98-0.44
Max drawdown-41.9%-34.4%
Current drawdown-28.8%-34.4%
Annualized volatility79.9%28.7%
Value at risk (95%)-6.2%-2.7%

Straight answers

Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.

Which is better, INTC or LHX?

On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LHX is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 45 against INTC's 44. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. 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 LHX the better buy right now?

LHX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.

Why does the AIQ Score favor LHX over INTC?

The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. INTC leads Momentum by 56 points; LHX leads Risk Resilience by 32 points; LHX leads Value by 28 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.

Which has more analyst upside, INTC or LHX?

Analyst price targets imply -0.1% upside for INTC and +28.3% for LHX, so the Street currently favors LHX. 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 LHX?

LHX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LHX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 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 LHX?

LHX 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 LHX?

INTC on the Momentum factor, by 56 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 LHX?

LHX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LHX on Risk Resilience, by 32 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 LHX?

The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.9% vs 25.5%; operating margin 0.1% vs 10%; ttm roe -10.8% vs 9.4%. 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 LHX's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?

LHX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-10, when LHX moved ahead of INTC.

What would change the INTC vs LHX 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 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to LHX's edge; INTC's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; LHX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 13 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate LHX's advantage entirely.

What do the current signals say about INTC and LHX?

INTC: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. LHX: 1 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 LHX it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).

Compare INTC and LHX 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.