INTC vs RUN Stock Comparison
RUN currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 40 vs 33. The clearest difference is value, while INTC has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between INTC and RUN?
RUN leads the current stock comparison as Sunrun Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Intel Corp. vs Sunrun Inc.
RUN leads
RUN leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from INTC.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support RUN, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Intel Corp.
Sunrun Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors RUN over INTC, 40 versus 33 as of Oct 31, 2026. RUN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while INTC holds the stronger quality profile. RUN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor RUN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. RUN lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RUN now leads by 7.
Compare Intel Corp. and Sunrun 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 RUN 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 73RUN +43
- Quality39 vs 18INTC +21
- Risk Resilience28 vs 18INTC +10
- Momentum34 vs 40RUN +6
4 of 6 evidence groups favor RUN. RUN’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; INTC keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
RUN's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTC and RUN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
RUN (Sunrun Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, technicals.
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
RUNRUN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
RUNRUN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
RUNRUN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 43 points.
Momentum
RUNRUN on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
INTCINTC on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
RUNRUN 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 | RUN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +76.7% | +98.8% | RUN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +107.6% | +87.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 25 | 11 | 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 RUN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | RUN | 33 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | RUNon balance | revenue growth 18.8% vs 20.5%; EPS growth -195.9% vs -32.4%; TTM ROE -10.8% vs 2.5%; gross margin 38.9% vs 34.5%; operating margin 0.1% vs 2.7% — RUN takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | RUN | Value 30 vs 73 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -35.3% vs -8.9%; vs 200-day 10.4% vs -40.8% |
| Risk Resilience | INTC | Risk Resilience 28 vs 18 |
| Analyst expectations | RUN | Target upside 76.7% vs 98.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTC and RUN 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 moderate at 7 points.
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 RUN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28RUN lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RUN now leads by 7.
- Today
- RUN +7
- 33 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- RUN +9
- 31 vs 40
- 30 sessions ago
- INTC +3
- 40 vs 37
- 90 sessions ago
- RUN +8
- 32 vs 40
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 9 when RUN 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.
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only INTC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (17.44%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only RUN
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (52.71%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
RUN 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -28.58%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.45%, 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 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to RUN's edge.
- 2INTC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3RUN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 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
RUN leads on balance| Metric | INTC | RUN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.8% | 20.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -195.9% | -32.4% |
| Gross margin | 38.9% | 34.5% |
| Operating margin | 0.1% | 2.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -10.8% | 2.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 4.36 |
Performance
INTC leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | INTC | RUN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.8% | -2.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -20.5% | -4.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.8% | -22.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.3% | -37.8% |
| Year to date | 158.9% | -59.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 149.6% | -64.4% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | INTC | RUN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.1 | 47.6 |
| ADX (14) | 25.5 | 22.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -35.3% | -8.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 10.4% | -40.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 52.8% | 59.7% |
Risk
INTC is the more resilient| Metric | INTC | RUN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.08 | 2.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.41 | -0.91 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.52 | -1.2 |
| Max drawdown | -41.9% | -67.8% |
| Current drawdown | -32.2% | -65.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 77.9% | 77.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -6.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INTC or RUN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, RUN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 40 against INTC's 33. 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 RUN the better buy right now?
RUN 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 lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor RUN over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. RUN leads Value by 43 points; INTC leads Quality by 21 points; INTC leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INTC or RUN?
Analyst price targets imply +76.7% upside for INTC and +98.8% for RUN, so the Street currently favors RUN. 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 RUN?
RUN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. RUN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 43 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 RUN?
RUN 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 RUN?
RUN on the Momentum factor, by 6 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 RUN?
INTC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. INTC on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 RUN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.9% vs 34.5%; operating margin 0.1% vs 2.7%; ttm roe -10.8% vs 2.5%. INTC leads on one measure and RUN on two measures, 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 RUN's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
RUN lead: Reversed — INTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; RUN now leads by 7. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-09, when RUN moved ahead of INTC.
What would change the INTC vs RUN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: INTC closes the Value gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to RUN's edge; INTC's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; RUN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; 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 INTC and RUN?
INTC: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. RUN: 1 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 INTC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On RUN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare INTC and RUN 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.