Intel Corporation (INTC)vs Micron Technology, Inc. (MU)

Quick verdict

The cleanest divide on this page is profit itself: in the twelve months to June 2026 Intel reported a net loss of $11.3bn on revenue of $57.0bn, while Micron, over the twelve months to May 2026, earned $50.5bn on revenue of $90.3bn. That single fact shapes everything else — Intel has no meaningful earnings multiple to quote, so the two cannot be lined up on P/E. Our scoring gives Micron the overall edge at 4.5 against 1.5, with wins on quality, balance sheet and income, while valuation, growth and momentum are graded too close to call. Micron carries the high-quality style tag; Intel is tagged mature. The tension for a reader is that the market already reflects much of this: Micron trades at 12.7 times sales and 11.4 times book against Intel's 8.5 and 5.5.

At-a-glance comparison

Business model and revenue mix

Both sit in the same industry classification — US-listed semiconductor makers on the Nasdaq — but they sell very different things. Intel designs and manufactures CPUs and related chips for PCs and data centres, and is layering a contract foundry business on top of that, which means it carries the cost of leading-edge fabs while serving customers who are also competitors. Micron makes DRAM and NAND memory and storage for data centres, phones, PCs and cars, a commodity-priced market where pricing cycles swing hard in both directions. Scale differs too: Micron's $90.3bn of trailing revenue is roughly half again as large as Intel's $57.0bn, yet Micron's market capitalisation of $1,148.1bn at the 4 September 2026 close is well over twice Intel's $483.2bn. Both report operating income directly, so no proxy measure is needed here.

Valuation

Rated a tie, and the reason is that the two are priced on different yardsticks. Intel has no usable price-to-earnings ratio because it lost money over the twelve months to June 2026, so the comparison falls to sales, book and cash. On sales Intel looks cheaper at 8.5 times against Micron's 12.7; on book, 5.5 times against 11.4. Those discounts reverse on the measures that reflect actual earnings power: Intel's EV/EBITDA of 42.3 sits far above Micron's 16.5, and Intel's free-cash-flow yield of 0.6% is well under Micron's 2.3%. Micron's P/E of 23.0 is struck on peak-cycle memory profits, which is its own risk. Neither set of multiples is obviously the better bargain, which is precisely why the factor is graded too close to call.

Growth profile

Measured over three and five years to fiscal 2025, the trajectories point opposite ways — yet this factor is also a tie, because neither record is clean. Intel's revenue shrank at 5.7% a year from fiscal 2022 and 7.5% a year from fiscal 2020, a consistent contraction rather than a single bad year. Micron grew revenue 6.7% a year from fiscal 2022 and 11.8% a year from fiscal 2020. Its earnings picture is less tidy: EPS compounded at 26.2% a year over five years from fiscal 2020, a figure flattered by a weak starting point in a memory downcycle, while the three-year EPS CAGR from fiscal 2022 is marginally negative at -0.7%. So Micron has the better top line, but its per-share earnings path depends heavily on which cycle point you start from.

Profitability and quality

Here the gap is not close. Micron converted 72.6% gross margin into a 65.6% operating margin and a 55.9% net margin over the twelve months to May 2026 — unusually wide even for memory at a cyclical peak. Intel held a 38.6% gross margin but ended slightly below breakeven at the operating line, at -0.1%, and at -19.8% on net margin. Note the gap between Intel's operating loss of $0.1bn and its net loss of $11.3bn: the bulk of the damage sits below the operating line in non-operating items, and that is why earnings-based ratios were not used for Intel. Cash generation follows the same pattern. Micron produced $26.2bn of free cash flow against Intel's $2.8bn, despite Intel still funding heavy manufacturing investment. Micron takes the quality factor decisively.

Balance-sheet risk

Financial structure separates them as sharply as the income statement. Micron held $25.0bn of cash against $5.7bn of total debt as at 28 May 2026, leaving net debt to EBITDA at -0.3 times — a net cash position — with a current ratio of 3.42 and interest cover of 258 times. Intel, as at 27 June 2026, carried $12.9bn of cash against $50.5bn of total debt, net debt to EBITDA of 3.06 times and a current ratio of 1.60. Intel's interest-coverage figure was withheld because it is not interpretable against an operating result that is close to zero and negative. Intel's shareholders' equity of $87.5bn is not far below Micron's $100.7bn, but it is supporting far more borrowing and no current earnings. The balance-sheet verdict goes to Micron.

Price performance and shareholder returns

Returns on capital tell the same story from a different angle. Micron generated a 66.6% return on equity and 62.1% return on invested capital over the twelve months to May 2026; because its debt load is small and it sits in a net cash position, those two figures are close together and are not an artefact of a shrunken equity base. Intel posted -11.7% on equity and roughly -0.05% on invested capital, the latter reflecting an operating result barely below breakeven. On shareholder distributions, Intel paid no dividend and returned nothing through buybacks over the period. Micron's payouts are modest rather than generous — a 0.05% dividend yield from $0.50 per share and a 0.06% buyback yield, with a payout ratio of 1.12% of earnings — but they exist, which is enough to take the income factor.

Which stock fits which investor

Style tags split the pair neatly: Micron carries the high-quality label, Intel the mature one. Investors screening for growth, income or quality will find Micron ahead on all three in our scoring, backed by 62.1% ROIC, a net cash balance sheet and $26.2bn of free cash flow. Value-focused screens get no clear answer — that category is a tie, because Intel's lower price-to-sales of 8.5 and price-to-book of 5.5 are offset by an EV/EBITDA of 42.3 and a 0.6% free-cash-flow yield, while Micron's cheaper cash-flow multiples rest on peak memory margins. Anyone considering Intel is effectively taking a view on whether the foundry build-out reverses five years of revenue contraction at -7.5% a year; anyone considering Micron is taking a view on where memory pricing sits in its cycle. Momentum is graded a tie.

• Value: Too close to call
• Growth: MU
• Income: MU
• Quality: MU

Frequently asked questions

Why is there no P/E ratio shown for Intel?

Intel reported a net loss of $11.3bn, or -$2.09 per share, over the twelve months to June 2026. A price-to-earnings ratio calculated on negative earnings is not meaningful, so it is not shown. Micron's P/E of 23.0 is based on positive trailing EPS of $44.24.

Which company is larger?

Micron is larger on both measures here: $90.3bn of trailing revenue to May 2026 against Intel's $57.0bn to June 2026, and a market capitalisation of $1,148.1bn against $483.2bn at the 4 September 2026 close.

Why did Intel's net loss so far exceed its operating loss?

Intel's operating result for the twelve months to June 2026 was a loss of just $0.1bn, against a net loss of $11.3bn. The difference sits in non-operating items below the operating line, which is why earnings-based ratios were withheld for Intel.

Does either company pay a dividend?

Micron paid $0.50 per share over the trailing period, a yield of 0.05%, with a payout ratio of 1.12% and a 0.06% buyback yield. Intel paid no dividend and had a buyback yield of zero.

Which has the stronger balance sheet?

Micron, on this data. It held $25.0bn cash against $5.7bn debt as at 28 May 2026, giving net debt to EBITDA of -0.3 times and a 3.42 current ratio. Intel had $12.9bn cash against $50.5bn debt, 3.06 times net debt to EBITDA and a 1.60 current ratio.

Related comparisons

• AAPL vs INTC
• AMD vs INTC
• AVGO vs MU
• NVDA vs INTC
• NVDA vs MU