SafetyMargin.ioSafetyMargin.io
BlogWatchlistCompare
Compare Stocks › EL vs INTC

The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL) vs Intel Corporation (INTC): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-21, EL is undervalued at $85, with a DCF intrinsic value of $362 and a margin of safety of 77%. INTC is overvalued at $134, with an intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -1513%. Of the two, EL has the wider margin of safety.

EL
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.
$84.81
VS
INTC
Intel Corporation
$133.99

Rewards

EL
  • ★Gross margin of 74.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
INTC

    Risks

    EL
    • ⚠ROIC has declined by 15.4 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
    • ⚠Despite buyback spending, shares outstanding increased in 3 out of 4 years — stock-based compensation is offsetting repurchases.
    • ⚠FCF yield of 5.9% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
    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 →
    EL
    INTC
    Valuation
    $1.81B
    Free Cash Flow
    $-8.30B
    5.89%
    FCF Yield
    -1.23%
    N/A
    Trailing P/E
    N/A
    26.63
    Forward P/E
    86.64
    Quality & Moat
    13.16%
    ROIC
    1.72%
    -5.95%
    ROE
    -2.91%
    74.65%
    Gross Margin
    37.20%
    1.42
    PEG Ratio
    1.36
    Balance Sheet Safety
    1.55
    Net Debt / Equity
    0.10
    N/A
    Interest Coverage
    N/A
    2.63
    Net Debt / EBITDA
    0.86
    1.65%
    Dividend Yield
    0.00%
    EL: 6Ties: 2INTC: 3
    ELINTC

    Historical Fundamentals

    Learn more →
    EL

    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 →
    EL
    N/A
    Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
    Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
    Σ Retained
    $-2.23B
    Δ Market Cap
    $-50.91B
    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 →
    EL
    76.6% Margin of Safety
    Price is 76.6% below estimated fair value
    Current Price: $84.81
    Fair Value: $362.42
    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 →
    EL

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $85?

    +8.0%
    Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

    Market pricing in significantly higher growth than history — aggressive.

    INTC

    Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

    Economic Moat Score

    Learn more →
    EL
    36/100
    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 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 →
    EL
    -2.75
    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 →
    EL
    Insiders 0.4%Institutions 97.2%Retail & Other 2.4%
    No. of Institutional Holders1,315
    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 Holders3,359
    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 →
    EL
    0
    Buys (3M)
    0
    Buys (12M)
    FRIBOURG PAUL J
    Director
    $2.96M
    @ $65.00 · 2025-02-07
    FRIBOURG PAUL J
    Director
    $5.72M
    @ $65.80 · 2025-02-06
    SHRIVASTAVA AKHIL
    Chief Financial Officer
    $46,053
    @ $65.79 · 2025-02-05
    FRIBOURG PAUL J
    Director
    $5.02M
    @ $64.48 · 2024-11-19
    FRIBOURG PAUL J
    Director
    $9.86M
    @ $64.46 · 2024-11-18
    SHRIVASTAVA AKHIL
    Chief Financial Officer
    $65,000
    @ $65.00 · 2024-11-14
    FRIBOURG PAUL J
    Director
    $10.05M
    @ $63.98 · 2024-11-14
    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 →
    EL
    0
    Sells (3M)
    10
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $1.02B
    LA LANDE RASHIDA K
    General Counsel
    $151,498
    @ $94.45 · 2025-11-26
    LAUDER JANE A
    Director and Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
    $1.68M
    @ $94.38 · 2025-11-26
    WEBSTER MERIDITH P
    Officer
    $476,971
    @ $87.84 · 2025-11-18
    STERNLICHT BARRY S
    Director
    $364,749
    @ $91.83 · 2025-11-11
    LEONARD A LAUDER 2013 REVOCABLE TRUST
    Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
    $249.91M
    @ $89.70 · 2025-11-06
    LAL 2015 ELF TRUST
    Trustee
    $508.60M
    @ $89.70 · 2025-11-06
    EVELYN H. LAUDER 2012 MARITAL TRUST TWO
    Trustee
    $255.22M
    @ $89.70 · 2025-11-06
    FORESTER LYNN
    Director
    $339,288
    @ $91.65 · 2025-08-29
    LA LANDE RASHIDA K
    General Counsel
    $589,594
    @ $91.88 · 2025-08-28
    LAUDER JANE A
    Director and Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
    $1.39M
    @ $88.23 · 2025-08-21
    FREDA FABRIZIO
    Chief Executive Officer
    $743,259
    @ $67.76 · 2024-11-01
    FORESTER LYNN
    Director
    $364,143
    @ $93.61 · 2024-08-23
    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 →
    EL
    FearGreed
    😨Fear(37/100)

    "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 →
    EL
    ⚪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 (37)
    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 EL Full AnalysisView INTC Full Analysis

    Frequently Asked Questions: EL vs INTC

    Is The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. or Intel Corporation more undervalued in 2026?▼

    Based on our discounted cash flow model, EL trades at a 76.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $362 vs. price $85), compared to INTC's -1512.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $134).

    Which stock has a wider economic moat, The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. or Intel Corporation?▼

    EL scores 36/100 (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 Intel Corporation in financial distress?▼

    INTC's Altman Z-Score of 2.1 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. EL scores 3.2 (Safe 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, The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. or Intel Corporation?▼

    The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL) generates a 5.9% 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, The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. or Intel Corporation?▼

    EL earns 13.2% 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.