Compare StocksCOP vs INTC

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

As of 2026-08-03, COP is fairly valued at $120, with a DCF intrinsic value of $113 and a margin of safety of -7%. INTC is overvalued at $90, with an intrinsic value of $7 and a margin of safety of -1271%. Of the two, COP has the wider margin of safety.

COP
ConocoPhillips
$120.48
VS
INTC
Intel Corporation
$90.20

Risks

COP
  • ROIC has declined by 17.9 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • Buybacks have been poorly timed — 3 out of 4 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
  • Trailing P/E of 20.4x is 69% above the historical average of 12.1x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
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 →
COP
INTC
Valuation
$7.24B
Free Cash Flow
$4.87B
4.93%
FCF Yield
1.07%
20.42
Trailing P/E
N/A
13.38
Forward P/E
44.27
Quality & Moat
11.77%
ROIC
3.57%
11.28%
ROE
-10.71%
45.59%
Gross Margin
38.87%
1.02
PEG Ratio
1.36
Balance Sheet Safety
0.26
Net Debt / Equity
0.20
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
0.73
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.24
2.79%
Dividend Yield
0.00%
COP: 9Ties: 1INTC: 1
COPINTC

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
COP

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 →
COP
$-1.99
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$14.97B
Δ Market Cap
$-29.73B
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 →
COP
39.4% Overvalued
Price is 39.4% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $120.48
Fair Value: $86.45
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 →
COP

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $120?

+8.1%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +9.4%

The market implies +8.1% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +9.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

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 →
COP
38/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though roic consistency 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 →
COP
-2.89
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 →
COP
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 87.3%Retail & Other 12.6%
No. of Institutional Holders3,062
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 →
COP
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $500,000
MCRAVEN WILLIAM H.
Director
$500,000
@ $86.69 · 2025-11-10
JOHNSON KIRK L
Officer
$499,472
@ $94.24 · 2025-06-16
MURTI ARJUN N
Director
$239,675
@ $95.87 · 2024-12-20
WALKER R A
Director
$1.02M
@ $97.80 · 2024-12-17
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 →
COP
1
Sells (3M)
12
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $127.52M
MULLIGAN SHARMILA
Director
$234,906
@ $119.00 · 2026-06-10
ROSE KELLY BRUNETTI
General Counsel
$1.00M
@ $130.03 · 2026-03-24
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$888,651
@ $127.06 · 2026-03-23
LANCE RYAN MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$64.49M
@ $127.26 · 2026-03-20
HRAP HEATHER GRACE
Officer
$317,631
@ $119.68 · 2026-03-13
LUNDQUIST ANDREW D
Officer
$4.13M
@ $119.68 · 2026-03-13
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$1.73M
@ $119.36 · 2026-03-12
HAYNES-WELSH KONTESSA S.
Officer
$1.24M
@ $120.07 · 2026-03-12
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$1.41M
@ $116.37 · 2026-03-11
ROSE KELLY BRUNETTI
General Counsel
$1.00M
@ $118.04 · 2026-03-09
LEACH TIMOTHY ALLEN
Director
$4.75M
@ $118.79 · 2026-03-06
LANCE RYAN MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$46.32M
@ $92.50 · 2025-12-19
LEACH TIMOTHY ALLEN
Director
$6.00M
@ $108.11 · 2024-08-13
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 →
COP
FearGreed
😏Greed(61/100)

"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.
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 →
COP
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 (61)
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 COP Full AnalysisView INTC Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: COP vs INTC

Is ConocoPhillips or Intel Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, COP trades at a -6.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $113 vs. price $120), compared to INTC's -1270.7% margin of safety (intrinsic $7 vs. $90).

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

COP scores 38/100 (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. COP scores 2.8 (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, ConocoPhillips or Intel Corporation?

ConocoPhillips (COP) generates a 4.9% free cash flow yield, compared to Intel Corporation's 1.1%. 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, ConocoPhillips or Intel Corporation?

COP earns 11.8% 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.

COP vs INTC: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io