At a Glance: The Q·Score

QCOM holds a Q·Score of 7.0, labelled "Bullish", while INTC sits at 5.3, labelled "Bearish" — a gap of 1.7 points on a 10-point scale. In Q·Score terms, that kind of spread typically reflects meaningful differences across multiple dimensions rather than a single outlier metric. As the section-by-section breakdown below shows, QCOM leads on three of the five dimensions, while the two tickers split the remaining two in ways that are worth examining closely.

Quality — Profitability and Capital Efficiency

QCOM leads on Quality, and the numbers make the case clearly. QCOM's net profit margin — the percentage of revenue that becomes actual profit after all costs — stands at 22.3%, a level that signals a well-run, high-margin business within the semiconductor sector. INTC, by contrast, carries a net profit margin of -5.9%, meaning it is currently spending more than it earns. The return on equity (ROE) — a measure of how efficiently a company generates profit from shareholders' money — reinforces this gap: QCOM's ROE is 36.1% versus INTC's -2.9%. Free cash flow yield data was not available for either ticker in this dataset, but the margin and ROE figures alone give the Quality edge firmly to QCOM.

Health — Balance Sheet and Execution

QCOM also leads on Health, with one particularly standout metric: an EPS beat rate — the percentage of recent quarters in which a company's reported earnings per share exceeded analyst expectations — of 100%. That means QCOM has beaten consensus earnings estimates in every quarter captured in this dataset. INTC's EPS beat rate of 75% is respectable in absolute terms and would be considered solid for most companies, but it trails QCOM's perfect record. Debt/equity and current ratio figures were not included in the provided dataset for either ticker, so the Health dimension score here leans heavily on execution consistency. INTC's negative profitability metrics do, however, introduce a note of caution around its broader financial resilience.

Growth — Revenue, Earnings, and Surprise

This is the one dimension where INTC shows a more competitive position, and the contrast is genuinely interesting. INTC's revenue growth sits at +7.2% year-over-year, while QCOM's revenue has contracted by -3.5% over the same period — a meaningful reversal of fortunes at the top line. However, the earnings growth picture flips the narrative entirely: QCOM recorded earnings growth of 173%, a dramatic expansion in profitability, while INTC's earnings growth figure is not available (reflecting the difficulty of calculating meaningful growth from a negative earnings base). In semiconductor sector context, where revenue cycles can be volatile and margin expansion often matters more than raw revenue momentum, QCOM's earnings trajectory carries significant weight. The data gives the Growth edge to QCOM on the strength of its earnings expansion, though INTC's revenue recovery is a data point worth noting.

Valuation — Price Relative to Fundamentals

INTC leads on Valuation, primarily because of a dramatic difference in forward P/E ratios. The forward P/E — calculated by dividing the current stock price by projected earnings per share over the next twelve months — is 69.6x for INTC and 17.9x for QCOM. At first glance, INTC's 69.6x looks expensive, but in the context of a company with currently negative earnings, a very high forward P/E often reflects the market pricing in a future earnings recovery rather than current profitability. QCOM's 17.9x is notably modest for a technology-sector company, where forward P/E ratios in the 20–35x range are common among profitable peers. On analyst consensus price targets, both stocks sit below their targets but with different implied moves: INTC has an implied downside of -13.9% from its current price of $107.04, while QCOM's consensus target implies a downside of -5.6% from $191.20 — meaning analysts, in aggregate, see both stocks as trading above their price targets, with INTC further above. The Valuation dimension score reflects relative positioning, and the data gives the edge to QCOM here in terms of earnings-based valuation, though the Q·Score methodology may weight these inputs differently.

Sentiment — Analyst Consensus

QCOM leads on Sentiment, though the margin is narrower than some of the other dimensions. Among the 31 analysts covering QCOM, 31% carry a positive rating on the stock. INTC is covered by a larger pool of 41 analysts, of whom 25% hold a positive rating. Neither figure represents a strong consensus of enthusiasm — in a typical large-cap technology stock, positive rating ratios above 50–60% are common — which means both tickers are operating with relatively cautious analyst communities. The divergence worth flagging here is that QCOM's "Bullish" Q·Score of 7.0 is driven more by its fundamental data quality than by analyst enthusiasm, since a 31% positive rating ratio is modest. INTC's 25% positive rating, combined with a consensus price target implying further downside, reflects a more sceptical analyst community overall.

What the Data Shows

QCOM holds the higher Q·Score at 7.0 ("Bullish") versus INTC's 5.3 ("Bearish"), a 1.7-point gap driven primarily by QCOM's commanding leads in Quality (22.3% profit margin vs. -5.9%) and earnings execution (173% earnings growth, 100% EPS beat rate). The dimensions were closest in Sentiment, where both tickers showed relatively low positive analyst rating ratios (31% vs. 25%), and in Growth, where INTC's +7.2% revenue expansion provides a genuine counterpoint to QCOM's top-line contraction — even as QCOM's earnings trajectory dominates that dimension. The overall picture is one of two companies at very different stages of their financial cycles, with the Q·Score framework capturing those differences across multiple data layers simultaneously.

Explore the Full Comparison

The live, interactive breakdown — updated in real time — is available at quantify.biz/compare/intc-vs-qcom.