Compare StocksAKAM vs INTC

Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM) vs Intel Corporation (INTC): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, AKAM is overvalued at $125, with a DCF intrinsic value of $28 and a margin of safety of -353%. INTC is overvalued at $134, with an intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -1513%. Of the two, AKAM has the wider margin of safety.

AKAM
Akamai Technologies, Inc.
$124.91
VS
INTC
Intel Corporation
$133.99

Risks

AKAM
  • Trailing P/E of 42.2x is 46% above the historical average of 28.8x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • Net debt/EBITDA of 4.3x indicates heavy leverage — it would take over 4 years of EBITDA to pay off net debt.
  • Free cash flow has declined at a 5.0% CAGR over the past 4 years — a concerning trend.
INTC
  • Intel Corporation scores only 17/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
  • Share count has increased by 21% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.
  • Insiders have sold $6.5M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
AKAM
INTC
Valuation
$700.72M
Free Cash Flow
$-8.30B
3.86%
FCF Yield
-1.23%
42.20
Trailing P/E
N/A
17.49
Forward P/E
86.70
Quality & Moat
3.32%
ROIC
1.72%
9.17%
ROE
-2.91%
58.28%
Gross Margin
37.20%
1.57
PEG Ratio
1.36
Balance Sheet Safety
1.01
Net Debt / Equity
0.10
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
4.30
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.86
0.00%
Dividend Yield
0.00%
AKAM: 6Ties: 1INTC: 4
AKAMINTC

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
AKAM

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

INTC

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

$1 Retained Earnings Test

Learn more →
AKAM
$-0.38
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$1.50B
Δ Market Cap
$-566.5M
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
INTC
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-22.02B
Δ Market Cap
+$74.94B
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Analysis

Learn more →
AKAM
353.4% Overvalued
Price is 353.4% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $124.91
Fair Value: $27.55
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
INTC
Insufficient Data
Enter initial FCF to calculate intrinsic value
Current Price: $133.99
Fair Value: $0.00
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
AKAM

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $125?

+20.5%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +14.5%

The market implies +20.5% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +14.5%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

INTC

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
AKAM
53/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with revenue predictability as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency would strengthen the moat.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.
INTC
17/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 5 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
AKAM
-2.80
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.
INTC
-2.83
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone
Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Ownership Breakdown

Learn more →
AKAM
Insiders 2.1%Institutions 111.6%
No. of Institutional Holders1,096
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
INTC
Insiders 14.7%Institutions 64.0%Retail & Other 21.2%
No. of Institutional Holders3,349
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

Insider Buying Activity

Learn more →
AKAM
0
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $3.83M
HESSE DANIEL R
Director
$216,897
@ $72.30 · 2025-08-11
LEIGHTON F THOMSON
Chief Executive Officer
$3.61M
@ $72.26 · 2025-08-11
LEIGHTON F THOMSON
Chief Executive Officer
$3.00M
@ $79.58 · 2025-02-27
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
INTC
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $249,985
ZINSNER DAVID A
Chief Financial Officer
$249,985
@ $42.50 · 2026-01-26
GELSINGER PATRICK P
Chief Executive Officer
$251,198
@ $22.53 · 2024-11-04
GELSINGER PATRICK P
Chief Executive Officer
$251,946
@ $20.16 · 2024-08-05
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises

Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.

Insider Selling Activity

Learn more →
AKAM
1
Sells (3M)
20
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $12.70M
SALEM-JACKSON KIM
Officer
$311,811
@ $135.57 · 2026-06-10
JOSEPH PAUL C
Officer
$531,256
@ $106.25 · 2026-03-16
KARON ADAM M
Officer
$1.83M
@ $107.43 · 2026-03-12
WILLIAMS ANTHONY P
Officer
$1.56M
@ $104.29 · 2026-03-11
MCGOWAN EDWARD J
Chief Financial Officer
$1.39M
@ $101.19 · 2026-03-10
RANGANATHAN MADHU
Director
$319,362
@ $102.00 · 2026-03-04
MILLER JONATHAN FRANK
Director
$1.13M
@ $102.67 · 2026-03-04
KARON ADAM M
Officer
$458,190
@ $96.91 · 2026-03-02
HOWELL LAURA
Officer
$1.13M
@ $100.14 · 2026-02-25
BLUMOFE ROBERT
Chief Technology Officer
$378,000
@ $108.00 · 2026-02-13
BLUMOFE ROBERT
Chief Technology Officer
$339,500
@ $97.00 · 2026-01-22
JOSEPH PAUL C
Officer
$450,874
@ $90.17 · 2026-01-15
KARON ADAM M
Officer
$289,836
@ $87.30 · 2026-01-02
MCGOWAN EDWARD J
Chief Financial Officer
$577,477
@ $88.03 · 2025-12-15
JOSEPH PAUL C
Officer
$438,451
@ $87.69 · 2025-11-17
BLUMOFE ROBERT
Chief Technology Officer
$263,051
@ $87.68 · 2025-11-14
BLUMOFE ROBERT
Chief Technology Officer
$301,000
@ $86.00 · 2025-11-07
JOSEPH PAUL C
Officer
$383,250
@ $76.65 · 2025-09-15
BLUMOFE ROBERT
Chief Technology Officer
$231,000
@ $77.00 · 2025-08-22
JOSEPH PAUL C
Officer
$388,700
@ $77.74 · 2025-07-15
BLUMOFE ROBERT
Chief Technology Officer
$253,714
@ $77.97 · 2025-06-12
SALEM-JACKSON KIM
Officer
$1.00M
@ $76.33 · 2025-05-27
KARON ADAM M
Officer
$333,863
@ $85.02 · 2025-05-08
JOSEPH PAUL C
Officer
$333,480
@ $83.37 · 2025-03-18
WILLIAMS ANTHONY P
Officer
$780,805
@ $82.19 · 2025-03-17
KARON ADAM M
Officer
$811,943
@ $82.34 · 2025-03-11
MCGOWAN EDWARD J
Chief Financial Officer
$971,911
@ $82.34 · 2025-03-11
KARON ADAM M
Chief Operating Officer
$485,140
@ $86.20 · 2025-03-10
MCGOWAN EDWARD J
Chief Financial Officer
$402,305
@ $86.48 · 2025-03-10
KARON ADAM M
Chief Operating Officer
$517,632
@ $80.49 · 2025-03-04
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
INTC
2
Sells (3M)
3
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $7.47M
CHANDRASEKARAN NAGASUBRAMANIYAN
Chief Technology Officer
$2.49M
@ $118.28 · 2026-05-29
MILLER BOISE APRIL
Officer
$4.01M
@ $99.53 · 2026-05-01
MILLER BOISE APRIL
Officer
$981,000
@ $49.05 · 2026-02-02
HOLTHAUS MICHELLE JOHNSTON
General Counsel
$650,000
@ $26.00 · 2024-11-07
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives

Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.

🎭 Mr. Market's Mood

Learn more →
AKAM
FearGreed
😨Fear(33/100)

"Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.
INTC
FearGreed
😏Greed(65/100)

"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

Composite sentiment score based on market signals. Inspired by Buffett’s "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

⚖️ Buffett Signal

Learn more →
AKAM
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Fear (33)
INTC
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Greed (65)
View AKAM Full AnalysisView INTC Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: AKAM vs INTC

Is Akamai Technologies, Inc. or Intel Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, AKAM trades at a -353.4% margin of safety (intrinsic value $28 vs. price $125), compared to INTC's -1512.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $134).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Akamai Technologies, Inc. or Intel Corporation?

AKAM scores 53/100 (Narrow moat), while INTC scores 17/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Intel Corporation in financial distress?

INTC's Altman Z-Score of 2.1 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. AKAM scores 2.3 (Grey zone). The Altman Z-Score is a five-factor model that predicts insolvency within two years; scores below 1.81 indicate significant distress.

Which company has better free cash flow, Akamai Technologies, Inc. or Intel Corporation?

Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM) generates a 3.9% free cash flow yield, compared to Intel Corporation's -1.2%. A higher FCF yield means the business converts more of its market value into cash that can be returned to shareholders or reinvested.

Which stock has higher return on invested capital, Akamai Technologies, Inc. or Intel Corporation?

AKAM earns 3.3% ROIC versus INTC's 1.7%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.