INTC vs SQM Stock Comparison
SQM currently leads INTC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 51 vs 30. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between INTC and SQM?
SQM leads the current stock comparison as Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Intel Corp. vs Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A.
SQM leads
SQM leads by 21 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support SQM, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Intel Corp.
Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SQM over INTC, 51 versus 30 as of Oct 21, 2026. SQM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value. SQM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SQM today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. SQM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 21 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Intel Corp. and Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. 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 SQM 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.
- Risk Resilience29 vs 71SQM +42
- Value30 vs 54SQM +24
- Quality39 vs 60SQM +21
- Momentum21 vs 24Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor SQM. SQM’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
SQM's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTC and SQM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SQM (Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
INTC (Intel Corp.): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 46.6% against 25.9%.
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
SQMSQM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SQMSQM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SQMSQM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 24 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
SQMSQM on Risk Resilience, by 42 points.
Analyst upside
SQMSQM 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 | SQM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.2% | +65.8% | SQM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +122.9% | +24.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 27 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SQM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SQM | 30 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | SQM | revenue growth 18.8% vs 40.3%; EPS growth -195.9% vs 80.5%; TTM ROE -10.8% vs 23.6%; gross margin 38.9% vs 42% |
| Valuation | SQM | Value 30 vs 54 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day -9.6% vs -17.3%; vs 200-day 7.8% vs -21.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SQM | Risk Resilience 29 vs 71 |
| Analyst expectations | SQM | Target upside 18.2% vs 65.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTC and SQM 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 21 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 SQM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SQM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 21 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SQM +21
- 30 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- SQM +20
- 30 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- SQM +6
- 43 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- SQM +15
- 42 vs 57
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only INTC
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (20.88%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.29%)
1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted
Only SQM
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.09%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Keltner Channel Breakdown, RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce, MACD Bearish Crossover.
SQM 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 +1.39%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.68%, 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 Risk Resilience gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to SQM's edge.
- 2INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3SQM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 4 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
SQM leads on balance| Metric | INTC | SQM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.8% | 40.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -195.9% | 80.5% |
| Gross margin | 38.9% | 42% |
| Operating margin | 0.1% | 38.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -10.8% | 23.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 0.84 |
Performance
INTC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | INTC | SQM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -10.8% | -4.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -26% | -14.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -10.7% | -13.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 38.4% | -31.2% |
| Year to date | 148.5% | -12% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 148.9% | 35.1% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | INTC | SQM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 16.4 | 25 |
| ADX (14) | 23.3 | 38.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.6% | -17.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7.8% | -21.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 46.6% | 25.9% |
Risk
SQM is the more resilient| Metric | INTC | SQM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.08 | 0.98 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.5 | 0.83 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.73 | 1.46 |
| Max drawdown | -41.9% | -37% |
| Current drawdown | -34.9% | -37% |
| Annualized volatility | 77.8% | 47.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -4.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INTC or SQM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SQM is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 51 against INTC's 30. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. 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 SQM the better buy right now?
SQM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 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 SQM over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SQM leads Risk Resilience by 42 points; SQM leads Value by 24 points; SQM leads Quality by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INTC or SQM?
Analyst price targets imply +18.2% upside for INTC and +65.8% for SQM, so the Street currently favors SQM. 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 SQM?
SQM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SQM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 24 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 SQM?
SQM 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 SQM?
The two are level on Momentum. 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 SQM?
SQM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SQM on Risk Resilience, by 42 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 SQM?
SQM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 38.9% vs 42%; operating margin 0.1% vs 38.8%; ttm roe -10.8% vs 23.6%.
Is SQM's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
SQM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 21 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the INTC vs SQM 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 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to SQM's edge; INTC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; SQM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 4 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 SQM?
INTC: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. SQM: 1 bullish / 4 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 SQM it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare INTC and SQM 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.