Intel Corporation (INTC) vs Vistra Corp. (VST): 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%. VST is fairly valued at $164, with an intrinsic value of $170 and a margin of safety of 4%. Of the two, VST has the wider margin of safety.
Rewards
- ★Share count has been reduced by 13% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
- ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $4.93 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
- ★PEG ratio of 0.47 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.
Risks
- ⚠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.
- ⚠FCF yield of 2.4% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
- ⚠High leverage (3.43x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
- ⚠Altman Z-Score of 1.42 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
Key Valuation Metrics
Learn more →Historical Fundamentals
Learn more →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.
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 →> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
> $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 →Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth
Learn more →Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.
What growth rate is the market pricing in at $164?
The market implies +23.9% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.
Standard FCF implies a demanding +21.9%, reflecting heavy growth investment.
Economic Moat Score
Learn more →No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.
Narrow moat with revenue predictability as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability would strengthen the moat.
Forensic Accounting
Learn more →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.
Ownership Breakdown
Learn more →High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
Insider Buying Activity
Learn more →Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.
Insider Selling Activity
Learn more →Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.
🎭 Mr. Market's Mood
Learn more →"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"
"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"
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 →The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
Frequently Asked Questions: INTC vs VST
Is Intel Corporation or Vistra Corp. more undervalued in 2026?▼
Based on our discounted cash flow model, VST trades at a 3.9% margin of safety (intrinsic value $170 vs. price $164), compared to INTC's -1512.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $134).
Which stock has a wider economic moat, Intel Corporation or Vistra Corp.?▼
VST scores 44/100 (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 Vistra Corp. in financial distress?▼
VST's Altman Z-Score of 1.4 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 Vistra Corp.?▼
Vistra Corp. (VST) generates a 2.4% 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 Vistra Corp.?▼
VST earns 16.0% 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.