Compare StocksAPA vs INTC

APA Corporation (APA) vs Intel Corporation (INTC): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-08-03, APA is undervalued at $37, with a DCF intrinsic value of $15283646367 and a margin of safety of 100%. INTC is overvalued at $90, with an intrinsic value of $7 and a margin of safety of -1271%. Of the two, APA has the wider margin of safety.

APA
APA Corporation
$37.32
VS
INTC
Intel Corporation
$90.20

Rewards

APA
  • APA Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 72.3% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • PEG ratio of 0.71 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.
INTC

    Risks

    APA
    • Trailing P/E of 8.7x is 43% above the historical average of 6.1x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
    • Altman Z-Score of 0.93 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
    • Free cash flow has declined at a 11.3% 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.
    • FCF yield of 1.1% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.

    Key Valuation Metrics

    Learn more →
    APA
    INTC
    Valuation
    $1.69B
    Free Cash Flow
    $4.87B
    N/A
    FCF Yield
    1.07%
    8.70
    Trailing P/E
    N/A
    9.05
    Forward P/E
    44.27
    Quality & Moat
    21.33%
    ROIC
    3.57%
    26.22%
    ROE
    -10.71%
    72.27%
    Gross Margin
    38.87%
    0.71
    PEG Ratio
    1.36
    Balance Sheet Safety
    0.57
    Net Debt / Equity
    0.20
    N/A
    Interest Coverage
    N/A
    0.81
    Net Debt / EBITDA
    1.24
    2.68%
    Dividend Yield
    0.00%
    APA: 7Ties: 1INTC: 2
    APAINTC

    Historical Fundamentals

    Learn more →
    APA

    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 →
    APA
    $-0.00
    created per $1 retained over 3 years
    Market Cap Declined
    Σ Retained
    $4.07B
    Δ Market Cap
    $-22.22
    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 →
    APA
    100.0% Margin of Safety
    Price is 100.0% below estimated fair value
    Current Price: $37.32
    Fair Value: $15283646367.18
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued
    INTC
    Insufficient Data
    Enter initial FCF to calculate intrinsic value
    Current Price: $90.20
    Fair Value: $0.00
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued

    Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

    Learn more →
    APA

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $37?

    -24.1%
    Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

    Market below historical growth — potential opportunity.

    INTC

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $90?

    +29.6%
    Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

    Market pricing in significantly higher growth than history — aggressive.

    Economic Moat Score

    Learn more →
    APA
    44/100
    Narrow Moat
    70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

    Narrow moat with roic consistency as the key competitive advantage. Improving revenue predictability 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 5 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 →
    APA
    -3.67
    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 →
    APA
    Insiders 0.4%Institutions 106.2%
    No. of Institutional Holders1,074
    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 63.9%Retail & Other 21.5%
    No. of Institutional Holders3,881
    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 →
    APA
    0
    Buys (3M)
    0
    Buys (12M)
    JOUNG CHANSOO
    Director
    $1.37M
    @ $18.25 · 2025-04-03
    ELLIS JULIET S.
    Director
    $100,027
    @ $22.78 · 2024-12-12
    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 →
    APA
    0
    Sells (3M)
    1
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $833,373
    BOB MATTHEW REGIS
    Director
    $833,373
    @ $36.23 · 2026-03-18
    Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
    INTC
    1
    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 →
    APA
    FearGreed
    😐Neutral(49/100)

    "Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"

    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
    😨Fear(39/100)

    "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.

    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 →
    APA
    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: Neutral (49)
    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: Fear (39)
    View APA Full AnalysisView INTC Full Analysis

    Frequently Asked Questions: APA vs INTC

    Is APA Corporation or Intel Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

    Based on our discounted cash flow model, APA trades at a 100.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $15283646367 vs. price $37), compared to INTC's -1270.7% margin of safety (intrinsic $7 vs. $90).

    Which stock has a wider economic moat, APA Corporation or Intel Corporation?

    APA scores 44/100 (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 APA Corporation in financial distress?

    APA's Altman Z-Score of 0.9 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. INTC scores 2.1 (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 stock has higher return on invested capital, APA Corporation or Intel Corporation?

    APA earns 21.3% ROIC versus INTC's 3.6%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.