Compare Stocks › INTC vs TMUS

Intel Corporation (INTC) vs T-Mobile US, Inc. (TMUS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-11-01, INTC is overvalued at $66, with a DCF intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -697%. TMUS is undervalued at $156, with an intrinsic value of $343 and a margin of safety of 54%. Of the two, TMUS has the wider margin of safety.

INTC
Intel Corporation
$65.76
VS
TMUS
T-Mobile US, Inc.
$156.44

Rewards

INTC
  • ★Net debt/EBITDA of -0.2x means the company holds more cash than debt — a net cash position.
TMUS
  • ★Gross margin of 63.0% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • ★Share count has been reduced by 10% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $4.64 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

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.
TMUS
  • ⚠High leverage (2.01x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 1.66 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
INTC
TMUS
Valuation
$670.37M
Free Cash Flow
$16.36B
0.19%
FCF Yield
9.87%
N/A
Trailing P/E
15.09
35.50
Forward P/E
10.91
Quality & Moat
4.06%
ROIC
10.46%
-9.62%
ROE
19.35%
40.15%
Gross Margin
62.98%
1.36
PEG Ratio
0.55
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
2.01
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.20
Net Debt / EBITDA
3.21
0.00%
Dividend Yield
2.99%
INTC: 2Ties: 1TMUS: 8
INTCTMUS

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.

TMUS

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
TMUS
$2.31
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$22.48B
Δ Market Cap
+$52.00B
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
TMUS
54.5% Margin of Safety
Price is 54.5% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $156.44
Fair Value: $343.46
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.

TMUS

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $156?

+9.8%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +5.5%

The market implies +9.8% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +5.5%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

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.
TMUS
45/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with revenue predictability 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.
TMUS
-2.73
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 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.
TMUS
Insiders 56.3%Institutions 43.9%
No. of Institutional Holders2,279
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
TMUS
0
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $2.98M
ALMEIDA ANDRE
Officer
$1.00M
@ $196.20 · 2026-05-01
GOPALAN SRINI
Chief Executive Officer
$1.98M
@ $201.82 · 2025-11-06
NELSON MARK WOLFE
General Counsel
$12,446
@ $188.58 · 2024-12-12
ALMEIDA ANDRE
Director
$897,528
@ $235.76 · 2024-12-09
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
TMUS
1
Sells (3M)
12
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $43.76M
DROBAC DANIEL JAMES
Officer
$137,671
@ $178.33 · 2026-09-10
FREIER JON
Chief Operating Officer
$911,810
@ $190.00 · 2026-05-21
KATZ MICHAEL J
Officer
$979,050
@ $195.81 · 2026-05-01
DATAR SRIKANT MADHAV
Director
$727,640
@ $221.10 · 2026-03-04
SIEVERT G MICHAEL
Director
$3.30M
@ $220.20 · 2026-02-24
NELSON MARK WOLFE
General Counsel
$517,968
@ $222.40 · 2026-02-24
SIEVERT G MICHAEL
Director
$17.20M
@ $214.94 · 2026-02-19
OSVALDIK PETER
Chief Financial Officer
$5.80M
@ $214.86 · 2026-02-18
NELSON MARK WOLFE
General Counsel
$3.64M
@ $220.38 · 2026-02-18
LONG LETITIA A
Director
$306,436
@ $210.32 · 2025-12-05
SIEVERT G MICHAEL
Director
$9.70M
@ $215.61 · 2025-11-18
KATZ MICHAEL J
Officer
$539,775
@ $215.91 · 2025-11-17
DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$30.82M
@ $239.15 · 2025-09-16
SIEVERT G MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$11.54M
@ $256.38 · 2025-08-19
KATZ MICHAEL J
Officer
$627,800
@ $251.12 · 2025-08-15
FIELD CALLIE R
Officer
$2.96M
@ $240.80 · 2025-07-29
FREIER JON
Officer
$1.75M
@ $250.00 · 2025-07-24
DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG
Director and Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$49.07M
@ $234.19 · 2025-06-30
SIEVERT G MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$10.92M
@ $242.69 · 2025-05-20
KATZ MICHAEL J
Officer
$592,800
@ $237.12 · 2025-05-15
DATAR SRIKANT MADHAV
Director
$191,990
@ $263.00 · 2025-03-05
OSVALDIK PETER
Chief Financial Officer
$6.58M
@ $263.23 · 2025-02-27
SIEVERT G MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$12.01M
@ $266.82 · 2025-02-26
EWALDSSON ULF
Officer
$5.16M
@ $265.63 · 2025-02-21
NELSON MARK WOLFE
General Counsel
$7.91M
@ $262.66 · 2025-02-20
BAZZANO DARA A
Officer
$525,400
@ $262.70 · 2025-02-19
FIELD CALLIE R
Officer
$2.72M
@ $262.70 · 2025-02-19
BAZZANO DARA A
Officer
$1.05M
@ $269.10 · 2025-02-18
KATZ MICHAEL J
Officer
$675,000
@ $270.00 · 2025-02-18
FIELD CALLIE R
Officer
$2.49M
@ $270.00 · 2025-02-18
NELSON MARK WOLFE
General Counsel
$2.76M
@ $270.00 · 2025-02-18
TAYLOR TERESA A
Director
$1.89M
@ $235.65 · 2025-02-03
LONG LETITIA A
Director
$254,188
@ $231.08 · 2024-12-13
SIEVERT G MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$9.57M
@ $239.22 · 2024-11-14
SIEVERT G MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$9.51M
@ $237.78 · 2024-11-12
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.
TMUS
FearGreed
😐Neutral(41/100)

"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: Fear (26)
TMUS
⚪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 (41)
View INTC Full AnalysisView TMUS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: INTC vs TMUS

Is Intel Corporation or T-Mobile US, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?▼

Based on our discounted cash flow model, TMUS trades at a 54.5% margin of safety (intrinsic value $343 vs. price $156), compared to INTC's -696.5% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $66).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Intel Corporation or T-Mobile US, Inc.?▼

TMUS scores 45/100 (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 T-Mobile US, Inc. in financial distress?▼

TMUS's Altman Z-Score of 1.7 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 T-Mobile US, Inc.?▼

T-Mobile US, Inc. (TMUS) generates a 9.9% 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 T-Mobile US, Inc.?▼

TMUS earns 10.5% 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.