Compare StocksINTC vs LYV

Intel Corporation (INTC) vs Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. (LYV): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, INTC is overvalued at $134, with a DCF intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -1513%. LYV is overvalued at $171, with an intrinsic value of $155 and a margin of safety of -10%. Of the two, LYV has the wider margin of safety.

INTC
Intel Corporation
$133.99
VS
LYV
Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
$171.24

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.
  • Insiders have sold $6.5M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.
LYV
  • FCF yield of 5.3% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • PEG ratio of 16.69 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • Insiders have sold $25.9M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
INTC
LYV
Valuation
$-8.30B
Free Cash Flow
$2.12B
-1.23%
FCF Yield
5.32%
N/A
Trailing P/E
N/A
86.70
Forward P/E
77.52
Quality & Moat
1.72%
ROIC
-16.71%
-2.91%
ROE
14.93%
37.20%
Gross Margin
25.87%
1.36
PEG Ratio
16.69
Balance Sheet Safety
0.10
Net Debt / Equity
1.05
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
0.86
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.01
0.00%
Dividend Yield
0.00%
INTC: 5Ties: 1LYV: 5
INTCLYV

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.

LYV

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
LYV
$8.94
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$1.95B
Δ Market Cap
+$17.42B
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: $133.99
Fair Value: $0.00
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
LYV
10.2% Overvalued
Price is 10.2% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $171.24
Fair Value: $155.41
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
INTC

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

LYV

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $171?

+27.3%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +7.4%

The market implies +27.3% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +7.4%, reflecting heavy 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.
LYV
51/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency 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 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.
LYV
-2.58
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.

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 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.
LYV
Insiders 32.5%Institutions 85.9%
No. of Institutional Holders1,146
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
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
LYV
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
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
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
LYV
2
Sells (3M)
3
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $26.09M
ROWLES MICHAEL G
General Counsel
$10.47M
@ $164.24 · 2026-05-08
HOPMANS JOHN
Officer
$15.46M
@ $166.07 · 2026-05-07
HINSON JEFFREY T
Director
$156,581
@ $165.87 · 2026-03-10
HOPMANS JOHN
Officer
$5.13M
@ $147.38 · 2025-05-16
HINSON JEFFREY T
Director
$539,520
@ $135.66 · 2025-05-09
HINSON JEFFREY T
Director
$61,475
@ $122.95 · 2025-03-12
CAPO BRIAN
Officer
$624,334
@ $123.24 · 2025-03-11
ROWLES MICHAEL G
General Counsel
$14.06M
@ $152.83 · 2025-02-25
BERCHTOLD JOSEPH
President
$2.86M
@ $97.50 · 2024-09-12
RAPINO MICHAEL JAMES
Chief Executive Officer
$9.64M
@ $97.50 · 2024-09-12
ROWLES MICHAEL G
General Counsel
$3.42M
@ $97.64 · 2024-09-11
HINSON JEFFREY T
Director
$536,815
@ $95.18 · 2024-09-09
CAPO BRIAN
Officer
$483,050
@ $96.61 · 2024-08-19
HINSON JEFFREY T
Director
$141,165
@ $94.11 · 2024-08-16
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
😏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.
LYV
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.

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: Greed (65)
LYV
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)
View INTC Full AnalysisView LYV Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: INTC vs LYV

Is Intel Corporation or Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, LYV trades at a -10.2% margin of safety (intrinsic value $155 vs. price $171), compared to INTC's -1512.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $134).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Intel Corporation or Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.?

LYV scores 51/100 (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 Intel Corporation in financial distress?

INTC's Altman Z-Score of 2.1 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. LYV scores 2.2 (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, Intel Corporation or Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.?

Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. (LYV) generates a 5.3% 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, Intel Corporation or Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.?

INTC earns 1.7% ROIC versus LYV's -16.7%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.