INTC vs WOR Stock Comparison
Compare INTC and WOR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between INTC and WOR?
WOR leads the current stock comparison as Worthington Industries, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Intel Corp. vs Worthington Industries, Inc.
WOR leads
WOR leads by 18 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 25 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support WOR, its lead is narrowing, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Intel Corp.
Worthington Industries, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors WOR over INTC, 62 versus 44 as of Sep 11, 2026. WOR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while INTC holds the stronger momentum profile. WOR also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WOR today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. WOR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 18 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Intel Corp. and Worthington Industries, 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 WOR 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 Resilience28 vs 65WOR +37
- Value30 vs 65WOR +35
- Quality39 vs 53WOR +14
- Momentum77 vs 66INTC +11
4 of 6 evidence groups favor WOR. WOR’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.
Largest factor move: Momentum -8
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
No new signals fired.
WOR's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTC and WOR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
WOR (Worthington Industries, 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 33.7%.
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
WORWOR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WORWOR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
WORWOR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 points.
Momentum
INTCINTC on the Momentum factor, by 11 points.
Lower downside
WORWOR on Risk Resilience, by 37 points.
Analyst upside
WORWOR 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 | WOR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -0.1% | +15.9% | WOR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +136.1% | +3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 27 | 2 | 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 WOR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | WOR | 44 vs 62 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 18.8% vs -1.9%; EPS growth -195.9% vs 6.5%; TTM ROE -10.8% vs 15.8%; gross margin 38.9% vs 27.3% |
| Valuation | WOR | Value 30 vs 65 |
| Technicals | INTC | Price vs 50-day 4.2% vs 0.3%; vs 200-day 33.4% vs 4.4% |
| Risk Resilience | WOR | Risk Resilience 28 vs 65 |
| Analyst expectations | WOR | Target upside -0.1% vs 15.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTC and WOR 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 18 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 WOR.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10WOR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 18 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- WOR +18
- 44 vs 62
- 7 sessions ago
- WOR +31
- 35 vs 66
- 30 sessions ago
- WOR +25
- 38 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- WOR +18
- 33 vs 51
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.
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
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.89%)
- 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.
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).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.18%, AIQ -1 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 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to WOR's edge.
- 2INTC's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3WOR's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 18-point move would eliminate WOR'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| Metric | INTC | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.8% | -1.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -195.9% | 6.5% |
| Gross margin | 38.9% | 27.3% |
| Operating margin | 0.1% | 6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -10.8% | 15.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 0.34 |
Performance
INTC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | INTC | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 11.4% | -3.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.6% | 1.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -6.3% | 0.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 109.1% | 16.8% |
| Year to date | 171.9% | 11.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 309.8% | -11.2% |
Technicals
INTC has the stronger structure| Metric | INTC | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 61.3 | 54.4 |
| ADX (14) | 15.5 | 19.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.2% | 0.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 33.4% | 4.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 58.9% | 33.7% |
Risk
WOR is the more resilient| Metric | INTC | WOR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.89 | 0.88 |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.12 | -0.27 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.98 | -0.33 |
| Max drawdown | -41.9% | -28.3% |
| Current drawdown | -28.8% | -12% |
| Annualized volatility | 79.9% | 31.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.2% | -3.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INTC or WOR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, WOR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 62 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 WOR the better buy right now?
WOR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 WOR over INTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WOR leads Risk Resilience by 37 points; WOR leads Value by 35 points; WOR leads Quality by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INTC or WOR?
Analyst price targets imply -0.1% upside for INTC and +15.9% for WOR, so the Street currently favors WOR. 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 WOR?
WOR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. WOR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 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 WOR?
WOR 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 WOR?
INTC on the Momentum factor, by 11 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 WOR?
WOR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WOR on Risk Resilience, by 37 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 WOR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.9% vs 27.3%; operating margin 0.1% vs 6%; ttm roe -10.8% vs 15.8%. 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 WOR's lead over INTC getting stronger or weaker?
WOR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 18 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the INTC vs WOR 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 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to WOR'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; WOR's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 18-point move would eliminate WOR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about INTC and WOR?
INTC: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. WOR: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on INTC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On WOR it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare INTC and WOR 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.