Compare Stocks › INTC vs LRCX

Intel Corporation (INTC) vs Lam Research Corporation (LRCX): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-11-02, INTC is overvalued at $66, with a DCF intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -697%. LRCX is fairly valued at $239, with an intrinsic value of $254 and a margin of safety of 6%. Of the two, LRCX has the wider margin of safety.

INTC
Intel Corporation
$65.76
VS
LRCX
Lam Research Corporation
$239.11

Rewards

INTC
  • ★Net debt/EBITDA of -0.2x means the company holds more cash than debt — a net cash position.
LRCX
  • ★Lam Research Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • ★Lam Research Corporation scores 81/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • ★Return on equity has consistently exceeded 20% over 4 years, indicating efficient use of shareholder capital.

Risks

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 0.2% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
LRCX
  • ⚠FCF yield of 1.5% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • ⚠Beneish M-Score of -1.64 flags financial patterns consistent with potential earnings manipulation — warrants further investigation.
  • ⚠5 insider sales totaling $44.6M with no purchases in the past 3 months — insiders are reducing their exposure.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
INTC
LRCX
Valuation
$670.37M
Free Cash Flow
$4.55B
0.19%
FCF Yield
1.52%
N/A
Trailing P/E
35.63
35.50
Forward P/E
19.54
Quality & Moat
4.06%
ROIC
46.74%
-9.62%
ROE
70.12%
40.15%
Gross Margin
51.05%
1.36
PEG Ratio
1.04
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.20
Net Debt / EBITDA
-0.37
0.00%
Dividend Yield
0.55%
INTC: 0Ties: 1LRCX: 10
INTCLRCX

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
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.

LRCX

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 →
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
LRCX
$14.97
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$13.01B
Δ Market Cap
+$194.79B
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 →
INTC
Insufficient Data
Enter initial FCF to calculate intrinsic value
Current Price: $65.76
Fair Value: $0.00
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
LRCX
35.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 35.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $239.11
Fair Value: $372.97
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
INTC

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $66?

+54.7%
Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

Market pricing in significantly higher growth than history — aggressive.

LRCX

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $239?

+17.4%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +23.8%

The market implies +17.4% Owner Earnings growth, roughly in line with history — reasonably priced.

Standard FCF implies +23.8%, reflecting ongoing growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
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.
LRCX
81/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by roic consistency. Revenue Predictability is the area most vulnerable to competitive pressure.

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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
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.
LRCX
-1.64
Likely 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.

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 →
INTC
Insiders 13.9%Institutions 62.8%Retail & Other 23.3%
No. of Institutional Holders4,439
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.
LRCX
Insiders 0.3%Institutions 88.8%Retail & Other 10.9%
No. of Institutional Holders4,055
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 →
INTC
1
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $10.25M
TAN LIP-BU
Chief Executive Officer
$10.00M
@ $95.00 · 2026-08-11
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
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
LRCX
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
HARTER AVA
Officer
$602.00
@ $66.89 · 2025-04-08
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 →
INTC
0
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
LRCX
5
Sells (3M)
21
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $172.81M
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$7.13M
@ $227.02 · 2026-10-23
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$9.58M
@ $319.26 · 2026-09-09
VARADARAJAN SESHASAYEE
Officer
$17.41M
@ $291.32 · 2026-09-02
HARTER AVA
Officer
$1.51M
@ $302.46 · 2026-08-31
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$9.00M
@ $300.00 · 2026-08-06
TALWALKAR ABHIJIT Y
Director
$6.12M
@ $335.00 · 2026-07-13
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$11.70M
@ $390.01 · 2026-07-02
BRANDT ERIC K
Director
$20.01M
@ $367.18 · 2026-06-12
BRANDT ERIC K
Director
$19.12M
@ $350.80 · 2026-06-11
FERNANDES NEIL J
Officer
$2.37M
@ $309.60 · 2026-06-01
FERNANDES NEIL J
Officer
$4.64M
@ $255.14 · 2026-05-01
HARTER AVA
Officer
$1.55M
@ $258.66 · 2026-04-27
HARTER AVA
Officer
$333,990
@ $222.66 · 2026-03-04
BETTINGER DOUGLAS R
Chief Financial Officer
$11.21M
@ $224.03 · 2026-03-04
HARTER AVA
Officer
$930,000
@ $232.50 · 2026-03-02
BETTINGER DOUGLAS R
Chief Financial Officer
$9.28M
@ $230.22 · 2026-03-02
BRANDT ERIC K
Director
$7.90M
@ $225.60 · 2026-02-06
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$26.76M
@ $163.86 · 2025-12-17
BETTINGER DOUGLAS R
Chief Financial Officer
$6.04M
@ $150.60 · 2025-11-14
MAYER BETHANY J
Director
$4,786
@ $159.53 · 2025-11-07
MAYER BETHANY J
Director
$207,667
@ $159.99 · 2025-11-03
HARTER AVA
Officer
$1.42M
@ $157.47 · 2025-10-27
VAHEDI VAHID
Officer
$7.25M
@ $138.90 · 2025-10-13
VARADARAJAN SESHASAYEE
Officer
$9.91M
@ $90.00 · 2025-02-20
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 →
INTC
FearGreed
😨Fear(26/100)

"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.
LRCX
FearGreed
😨Fear(31/100)

"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 →
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 (26)
LRCX
⚪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 (31)
View INTC Full AnalysisView LRCX Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: INTC vs LRCX

Is Intel Corporation or Lam Research Corporation more undervalued in 2026?▼

Based on our discounted cash flow model, LRCX trades at a 6.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $254 vs. price $239), compared to INTC's -696.5% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $66).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Intel Corporation or Lam Research Corporation?▼

LRCX scores 81/100 (Wide 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. LRCX scores 20.9 (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, Intel Corporation or Lam Research Corporation?▼

Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) generates a 1.5% free cash flow yield, compared to Intel Corporation's 0.2%. 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, Intel Corporation or Lam Research Corporation?▼

LRCX earns 46.7% ROIC versus INTC's 4.1%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Does Lam Research Corporation have accounting red flags?▼

LRCX's Beneish M-Score of -1.6 flags it as a likely earnings manipulator (above the -1.78 threshold). By contrast, INTC scores -2.8, within the normal range. The Beneish model detects aggressive accounting through eight financial ratios.