Compare StocksCMS vs INTC

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

As of 2026-06-19, CMS is overvalued at $73, with a DCF intrinsic value of $12 and a margin of safety of -515%. INTC is overvalued at $134, with an intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -1513%. Of the two, CMS has the wider margin of safety.

CMS
CMS Energy Corporation
$73.38
VS
INTC
Intel Corporation
$133.99

Rewards

CMS
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.38 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
INTC

    Risks

    CMS
    • CMS Energy Corporation scores only 25/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
    • PEG ratio of 2.86 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
    • High leverage (1.88x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
    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 →
    CMS
    INTC
    Valuation
    $-2.16B
    Free Cash Flow
    $-8.30B
    -9.51%
    FCF Yield
    -1.23%
    20.33
    Trailing P/E
    N/A
    17.59
    Forward P/E
    86.70
    Quality & Moat
    4.74%
    ROIC
    1.72%
    10.37%
    ROE
    -2.91%
    40.55%
    Gross Margin
    37.20%
    2.86
    PEG Ratio
    1.36
    Balance Sheet Safety
    1.88
    Net Debt / Equity
    0.10
    N/A
    Interest Coverage
    N/A
    6.20
    Net Debt / EBITDA
    0.86
    3.08%
    Dividend Yield
    0.00%
    CMS: 6Ties: 1INTC: 4
    CMSINTC

    Historical Fundamentals

    Learn more →
    CMS

    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 →
    CMS
    $2.73
    created per $1 retained over 3 years
    Exceptional Value Creator
    Σ Retained
    $1.09B
    Δ Market Cap
    +$2.98B
    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 →
    CMS
    514.9% Overvalued
    Price is 514.9% above estimated fair value
    Current Price: $73.38
    Fair Value: $11.93
    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 →
    CMS

    Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

    INTC

    Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

    Economic Moat Score

    Learn more →
    CMS
    25/100
    No Moat
    70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

    No durable moat detected, though margin stability 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 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 →
    CMS
    -2.43
    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 →
    CMS
    Insiders 0.6%Institutions 100.5%
    No. of Institutional Holders1,127
    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 →
    CMS
    0
    Buys (3M)
    1
    Buys (12M)
    Total value (12M): $153,398
    LEOPOLD DIANE
    Director
    $153,398
    @ $76.70 · 2026-02-25
    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 →
    CMS
    1
    Sells (3M)
    7
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $2.40M
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $222,930
    @ $74.31 · 2026-05-26
    MCINTOSH SCOTT B.
    Officer
    $136,859
    @ $78.21 · 2026-03-02
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $312,940
    @ $78.23 · 2026-02-27
    RUSSELL JOHN G.
    Director
    $1.13M
    @ $75.75 · 2026-02-20
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $289,882
    @ $72.47 · 2025-11-03
    SNYDER LAUREN Y
    Officer
    $158,199
    @ $71.26 · 2025-09-05
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $147,246
    @ $73.62 · 2025-08-08
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $161,790
    @ $73.61 · 2025-05-06
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $147,540
    @ $73.77 · 2025-03-03
    WRIGHT LAURA H
    Director
    $174,609
    @ $69.84 · 2025-02-19
    MCINTOSH SCOTT B.
    Officer
    $467,392
    @ $69.76 · 2025-02-13
    RUSSELL JOHN G.
    Director
    $1.89M
    @ $65.85 · 2024-12-19
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $134,443
    @ $67.22 · 2024-12-13
    MCINTOSH SCOTT B.
    Officer
    $64,116
    @ $68.50 · 2024-11-21
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $136,345
    @ $68.17 · 2024-11-18
    HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
    Officer
    $137,709
    @ $68.85 · 2024-09-04
    RICH BRIAN F
    Officer
    $263,982
    @ $66.00 · 2024-08-01
    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 →
    CMS
    FearGreed
    😐Neutral(57/100)

    "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
    😏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 →
    CMS
    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 (57)
    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 CMS Full AnalysisView INTC Full Analysis

    Frequently Asked Questions: CMS vs INTC

    Is CMS Energy Corporation or Intel Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

    Based on our discounted cash flow model, CMS trades at a -514.9% margin of safety (intrinsic value $12 vs. price $73), compared to INTC's -1512.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $134).

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

    CMS scores 25/100 (None 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 CMS Energy Corporation in financial distress?

    CMS'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 company has better free cash flow, CMS Energy Corporation or Intel Corporation?

    Intel Corporation (INTC) generates a -1.2% free cash flow yield, compared to CMS Energy Corporation's -9.5%. 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, CMS Energy Corporation or Intel Corporation?

    CMS earns 4.7% 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.