Should YOU BUY Intel Stock NOW? - INTC Stock Analysis

📉 Intel Stock Analysis: Roller Coaster Year & What’s Next! 📈

After Intel stock (INTC) hit a 52-week high of $51.28 in December 2023, missing Q2 2024 expectations sent the stock plummeting (26%). Yesterday, it hit a 52-week low of $19.83. So, is Intel's (INTC) downward spiral a warning sign, or could it be the best buying opportunity of the decade? 🤔 Let’s dive in and find out!

In this comprehensive Intel stock analysis, we’ll explore:
1. 📊 Background & Business Model: How does Intel operate, and what makes it a household name in the semiconductor stocks space?
2. 🌟 Opportunities & Risks: An in-depth look into the positives and negatives highlighted in this Intel stock review.
3. 💼 Valuation & Predictions: Detailed Intel DCF valuation, stock market forecasts, and whether Intel (INTC) is a good investment right now.

We discuss Intel's recent earnings, the challenges it faces in the AI and chip stocks arena, and its competitive positioning against AMD and NVIDIA. Get ready for a no-holds-barred review of whether INTC stock can rebound or if it's destined for more pain.

🔍 Here’s what you’ll find in this video:
- A dive into Intel's business model and history
- The latest INTC news, market sentiment, and insider moves
- Detailed valuation and financial analysis using Ken’s Intel DCF valuation model
- Key insights on Intel's competition with AMD and NVIDIA in the AI stocks and semiconductor stocks space
- A thorough examination of Intel's earnings, opportunities, and risks
Is Intel (INTC) still a powerhouse in chip stocks, or is the decline a sign to sell?

Watch until the end for our final verdict and share your thoughts on whether Intel stock is poised for a comeback!

🔔 Hit that Subscribe button and smash the Like button if you enjoy deep-dive stock analyses like this.
Share with fellow investors who might benefit from this comprehensive review!

Remember: Investing in the stock market involves risks. Please consult with a financial advisor to assess your individual needs and risk tolerance before making investment decisions. Ken Freeman’s insights are aimed to educate and should not be taken as definitive investment advice.

#IntelStock #INTC #SemiconductorStocks #IntelStockAnalysis #Intel #INTCStockReview #IsINTCaGoodInvestment #IntelProblem #INTCStockEarnings #INTCStockAnalysis #IntelCrash #INTCNews #INTCStock #IntelStockDCFValuation #StockMarket

Join us on this rollercoaster journey to uncover the truth behind Intel's stock performance and potential future!

👇 Don't forget to leave your comments and engage with us on your thoughts about Intel's market position and future prospects.
📌 Follow us for more financial insights and detailed stock analyses. Your support helps us bring you more valuable content!

[elrondes]

I see a lot of similarities that current Intel has with AMD in the 2010s. Remember AMD was on the brink of bankruptcy before Lisa Su turned it around. They had to spin off their foundry, laid off thousands, and refocused on core products that could compete on efficiency and price.

No reason why intel can't do the same; spin off foundry, and focus on design and stop trying to do too much at once.

[peterpalumbo]

If I had to choose over suspending dividend or saving a company, I would save the company. The dividend could be reinstalled later.

[AB-jrny]

If you like it at 20, you'll love it at 10.

[spikesandcurles]

Just subscribed!! Thanks for this great analysis!

[stormforge]

Love the financial analysis, subscribed for more.

[gentileinvest]

To be honest, Ken, I think you went really bearish with your projection for the company. I don't believe capex will remain at the same levels we've seen in the past. The expectations on the street are for revenue to increase by 6% CAGR over the next five years, while capex is expected to decrease. If Intel maintains the same level of capex in the coming years without growing revenue, which is a possibility, they could easily go bankrupt.

[BillF-pu]

Great Video with an excellent explanation.

[rhythmandacoustics]

The main competitor is not amd but arm. Arm is taking so much of the market since the architectures are different.

[william]

Bought Intel shares back at $20/share but expect “shorts” to drive value to your $11/share value, much like happened to Walgreens & Hertz!

[jeffreyharrison]

Wow! Absolutely fantastic analysis! I just subscribed and look forward to other episodes. Thanks!

[geovanelemond]

Ken! 🐐 Can't believe this popped up on my algo. Great video... brings me back to RTWS

[waynehawkins]

I think Intel will bounce back. I'm so sure I just put $1000US in shares and plan to buy more next month. Go Intel, I believe in you.

[fixedG]

Every financial analysis I see on Intel lately ignores the massive defect on their 13th and 14th generation CPUs that they're dealing with right now. It's tremendous, they're not handling it well and they're absolutely burning their reputation with the enthusiast and PC crowd. They missed the boat on small, efficient device processors. They missed the boat on GPUs. AMD has or is overtaking them in the high performance PC space. But all that said, Intel also owns its own fabs, which don't exactly grow on trees. If nothing else, it's a candidate to get bought outright by another US processor company for manufacturing capacity alone.

[jkultimate]

intel is a company with 90, 000 employees, i think they can reduce it to 60, 000 and gain back the competitive edge.

[LegDayLas]

The fact Intel has just cut there dividend tells me they are finally taking this seriously with innovation. I'm bearish short term and bullish long term. Not worth jumping on now as they have more bad news to come, but they have the framework there to thrive if they can successfully innovate there way back into a competitive position.

[dante]

Great video, was wondering a lot of this myself after their earnings release

[hnt]

thanks for your thorough fundamental analysis of intel

[BraydenBoyko]

Interesting analysis, the company already trades at Tangible Book Value. None of the companies bonds are pricing default. Trading well below tangible book value is common in companies who are amidst the process of default. I am all for extremely conservative outlooks, but this seems unreasonably harsh. I think you underestimated how much value can be created from the massive spend in CAPEX, especially through the subsidized PP&E. I don't doubt that it's a long road ahead, but the positioning appears to be deep value with the potential to be a value trap. Not the other way around. I really liked your point about the selling pressure caused by cutting the dividend, I think that was a crucial aspect of the recent sell off. It's not for everyone, but for investors who can stomach a few years of stagnant investment growth, I think the value is there. I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this thesis. Well done video by the way.

[TeamSolidPlayers]

Fantastic video, I have a really small position in intel and I'm planning to hold (as it's an amount that I wouldn't be really be missing). Of course hoping the company can bounce back, but realisticly it will take a long time.

[RobFox]

Thank you for sharing your insight. A lot of research clearly went into making this video. I do however feel that a few areas in your DCF valuation could perhaps be strengthened.

1- a capex/sales ratio of 40+% is being modeled in. Typically any expantionary capex is reasonably expected to eventually translate into higher growth. However, revenue growth is kept constant at 2.0% throughout the discrete period. This implies that all that capex is purely "maintenance" in nature (i.e. R&D to stay relevant in the market) but given my understanding of Intel's expansion of the foundry segment I don't believe that's the case. A 2.0% yoy revenue growth implies in theory lower sales volumes as it is lower than projected inflation. As such, if the expectation is indeed 2.0% annual revenue growth into perpetuity, we are indirectly assuming the company will keep decreasing in market share until it vanishes.

2- If I am not mistaken, FCFFs are negative all the way up to the end of the discrete period. An exit-multiple based terminal value approach is then applied. While this may be a reaonable approach for an early stage tech startup, it is challenging to understand conceptually how they would theoretically secure a 3x revenue multiple in line with comps while still burning cash. If it is truly the case that a mature company is expected to remain cash burning at normalised levels, then its value is inherently nil. This point is also a consequence of the first point above on the disconnect between capex and revenue growth, where the return on their capex does not seem to be captured in the valuation.


Those are just my thoughts on the DCF valuation approach. Overall I thank you again for taking the time to make these videos and sharing.