PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
176.45 - 178.59
86.62 - 184.48
124.91M / 173.95M (Avg.)
50.81 | 3.50
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
-11.53%
Negative revenue growth while INTC stands at 9.34%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
8.99%
Gross profit growth under 50% of INTC's 29.75%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
20.44%
EBIT growth below 50% of INTC's 99.21%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
20.44%
Operating income growth under 50% of INTC's 99.21%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
3.66%
Positive net income growth while INTC is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
3.85%
Positive EPS growth while INTC is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
3.85%
Positive diluted EPS growth while INTC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.48%
Share reduction while INTC is at 0.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.68%
Reduced diluted shares while INTC is at 0.79%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.48%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while INTC cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-69.13%
Negative OCF growth while INTC is at 107.41%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-116.49%
Negative FCF growth while INTC is at 102.31%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
393.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 24.47%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
118.57%
Positive 5Y CAGR while INTC is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
93.37%
Positive 3Y CAGR while INTC is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
116.55%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 20.46%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
-67.09%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-76.51%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
226.07%
Positive 10Y CAGR while INTC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-21.17%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-25.67%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
353.20%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 117.64%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
226.49%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 55.04%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
87.08%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 36.11%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.64%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while INTC is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
1.31%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while INTC cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-7.69%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
14.53%
We show growth while INTC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-6.87%
Negative asset growth while INTC invests at 1.73%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-10.06%
We have a declining book value while INTC shows 0.68%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-6.35%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.63%
We increase R&D while INTC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
6.59%
We expand SG&A while INTC cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.