Compare StocksINTC vs MET

Intel Corporation (INTC) vs MetLife, Inc. (MET): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-21, INTC is overvalued at $134, with a DCF intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -1513%. MET is fairly valued at $86, with an intrinsic value of $103 and a margin of safety of 17%. Of the two, MET has the wider margin of safety.

INTC
Intel Corporation
$133.99
VS
MET
MetLife, Inc.
$85.58

Rewards

INTC
    MET
    • MetLife, Inc. scores 100/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
    • Share count has been reduced by 16% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
    • Trailing P/E of 16.6x is 27% below the historical average of 22.5x — potentially undervalued relative to its own history.

    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.
    MET
    • Gross margin of 23.8% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
    • Altman Z-Score of 0.23 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.

    Key Valuation Metrics

    Learn more →
    INTC
    MET
    Valuation
    $-8.30B
    Free Cash Flow
    $-17.43B
    -1.23%
    FCF Yield
    -31.65%
    N/A
    Trailing P/E
    16.55
    86.64
    Forward P/E
    7.78
    Quality & Moat
    1.72%
    ROIC
    7.87%
    -2.91%
    ROE
    13.01%
    37.20%
    Gross Margin
    23.75%
    1.36
    PEG Ratio
    0.45
    Balance Sheet Safety
    0.10
    Net Debt / Equity
    0.79
    N/A
    Interest Coverage
    N/A
    0.86
    Net Debt / EBITDA
    3.68
    0.00%
    Dividend Yield
    2.77%
    INTC: 5Ties: 1MET: 5
    INTCMET

    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.

    MET

    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
    MET
    $-1.11
    created per $1 retained over 3 years
    Market Cap Declined
    Σ Retained
    $4.19B
    Δ Market Cap
    $-4.65B
    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
    MET
    17.1% Margin of Safety
    Price is 17.1% below estimated fair value
    Current Price: $85.58
    Fair Value: $103.25
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued

    Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

    Learn more →
    INTC

    Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

    MET

    Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

    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.
    MET
    100/100
    Wide Moat
    70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

    Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. Reinvestment Efficiency 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.
    MET
    -2.01
    Possible 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 Holders3,359
    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.
    MET
    Insiders 16.4%Institutions 78.4%Retail & Other 5.2%
    No. of Institutional Holders1,859
    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
    MET
    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
    MET
    1
    Sells (3M)
    1
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $1.74M
    DEBEL MARLENE
    Officer
    $1.74M
    @ $81.59 · 2026-06-01
    PAPPAS BILL
    Officer
    $2.09M
    @ $80.49 · 2025-05-12
    KHALAF MICHEL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $1.73M
    @ $82.84 · 2024-12-13
    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.
    MET
    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 →
    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)
    MET
    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 INTC Full AnalysisView MET Full Analysis

    Frequently Asked Questions: INTC vs MET

    Is Intel Corporation or MetLife, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

    Based on our discounted cash flow model, MET trades at a 17.1% margin of safety (intrinsic value $103 vs. price $86), compared to INTC's -1512.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $134).

    Which stock has a wider economic moat, Intel Corporation or MetLife, Inc.?

    MET scores 100/100 (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 MetLife, Inc. in financial distress?

    MET's Altman Z-Score of 0.2 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, Intel Corporation or MetLife, Inc.?

    Intel Corporation (INTC) generates a -1.2% free cash flow yield, compared to MetLife, Inc.'s -31.7%. 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 MetLife, Inc.?

    MET earns 7.9% 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.