'Credit Metrics Remain Weak': Intel Stock (NASDAQ:INTC) Surges Despite Fitch's Punch to the Credit Rating
Elevate Your Investing Strategy:
Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence.
The new word from Fitch is generally negative, reports noted, with a downgrade in long-term issuer default rating and senior unsecured ratings, dropped from BBB+ to BBB. However, Fitch did leave the short-term IDR and commercial paper rating alone, still at F2. These ratings changes, reports noted, represent a '…more challenging demand environment than previously anticipated, which is constraining profitability growth…' at Intel.
Further, Fitch analysts pointed out that '…credit metrics remain weak, and will require both stronger end markets and successful product ramps, along with net debt reduction over the next 12-24 months, to return EBITDA leverage to levels consistent with the ratings.' Fitch did have some positive things to say, particularly about how Intel has changed its foundry strategy, but even then, there is still significant risk.
Speaking of That Foundry Strategy
But that foundry issue is coming back to haunt Intel, reports note, as there are some issues with the 18A process. Some reports have suggested it may not have long to live anyway, but apparently Intel is going with it, at least for now. And what Intel is finding is not exactly welcome news either.
Reports noted that Intel's upcoming Panther Lake chips are seeing 'three times too many defects' than they should. This news comes alongside earlier reports that suggest the 18A process is having trouble keeping up on the volume end of things as well. And with a planned launch on Panther Lake still set for the fourth quarter, this is bad news in pretty much every sense. Intel needs the Panther Lake launch to go smoothly, especially if it wants any chance at reaching those 'successful product ramps' that Fitch referenced earlier.
Is Intel a Buy, Hold or Sell?
Turning to Wall Street, analysts have a Hold consensus rating on INTC stock based on one Buy, 25 Holds and three Sells assigned in the past three months, as indicated by the graphic below. After a 1.66% loss in its share price over the past year, the average INTC price target of $22.25 per share implies 9.96% upside potential.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
an hour ago
- Epoch Times
Intel ‘Engaging With' White House After Trump Calls for CEO to Resign Over China Portfolio
Intel's new CEO Lip-Bu Tan, a long-term chip executive and prolific investor, came under scrutiny for his investments in China's largest chip companies. Intel's CEO Lip-Bu Tan on Aug. 7 said the company is engaging with the Trump administration after President Donald Trump called for Tan's resignation over his alleged ties to Chinese companies with military backgrounds. Tan, a chip veteran and prolific investor, took the reins of Intel in March as the embattled chipmaker tries to regain territory from its competitors. Trump on Aug. 7 called for Tan's immediate resignation, after Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) raised concerns over Tan's history of investing in Chinese companies, including those with alleged ties to the People's Liberation Army (PLA), via Walden International; and over his tenure at Cadence Design Systems, which pleaded guilty in July to unauthorized selling of controlled chip design tools to a Chinese military university between 2015 and 2021, when Tan was CEO of the company. Story continues below advertisement In a statement , Tan said he 'fully share[s] the President's commitment to advancing U.S. national and economic security.' The executive said that there has been 'a lot of misinformation' about his past roles at Walden International and Cadence Design Systems, and that Intel is 'engaging with the Administration to address the matters that have been raised and ensure they have the facts.' In a separate statement , Intel said the company, its board of directors, and Tan are 'deeply committed to advancing U.S. national and economic security interests and are making significant investments aligned with the President's America First agenda.' Tan, 65, a naturalized U.S. citizen, is an ethnic Chinese born in Malaysia. He was educated in Singapore and the United States and has been a U.S. resident for more than 40 years. The long-term tech investor sat on the board of Intel for two years before stepping down in August 2024. He rejoined the board and was appointed CEO in March. Story continues below advertisement As founder and chairman of Walden International, a California-based venture capital firm that described itself as 'one of the pioneers in venture investing in China,' he was also a board member of multiple Chinese companies, including state-backed chipmakers Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC) and Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment (AMEC), and tech conglomerate Sina. SMIC, a partially state-owned semiconductor foundry company, was blacklisted by multiple U.S. departments, including the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), as a Chinese military company. According to a July 2020 statement , Tan, who, at the time, had been a SMIC board member for 18 years, said Walden International was 'the founding shareholder and close partner of SMIC at its founding in 2000.' Walden no longer holds a stake in SMIC. AMEC, also partially state-owned, was designated by the DOD as a Chinese military company in 2021 and removed from the list in December 2024. Story continues below advertisement Tan was an AMEC board member between February 2005 and April 2020, his LinkedIn profile shows. According to Wirescreen , which provides open-source intelligence on companies' links to China, Tony Zhang, a managing partner of Walden International, is currently on the board of AMEC. In a report published in 2024, the House Select Committee on CCP, which investigated five U.S. venture capital firms, including Walden International, said U.S. investments had been 'critical to the early growth and success' of some of China's 'largest and most notorious AI and semiconductor companies, many of which are now blacklisted by the U.S. government over national security concerns,' and many of which are backed by the Chinese regime. According to the report, SMIC, China's largest chip foundry, and its affiliates, received $125 million in early investment from Walden. Story continues below advertisement The committee said the firms have also invested in Chinese companies that are blacklisted by the U.S. government for supporting genocide or other human rights abuses or for supporting the Chinese military. It's unclear whether Walden has divested from these companies. Intel and the White House did not respond to The Epoch Times's request for comment by publication time.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Bloomberg Tech: Nvidia, AMD AI Deal
Browse all episodes Bloomberg Tech: Nvidia, AMD AI Deal Bloomberg Tech Nvidia, AMD AI Deal Arrow Right 33:47 Bloomberg's Caroline Hyde and Ed Ludlow discuss Nvidia's and AMD's agreement to pay 15% of their revenues from Chinese artificial intelligence chip sales to the US government. Analysts and investors react to the 'unprecedented' deal. Plus, Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan is set to meet with President Donald Trump, after the US leader called his resignation.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'pay-to-play' deals blur line between govt. & free market
It seems "pay to play" may be the name of the game for corporate leaders under the second Trump administration. Nvidia (NVDA) and, reportedly, AMD (AMD), will give the US government 15% of their China chip sales. The artificial intelligence (AI) chipmaker deal comes after the Trump administration secured an additional $100 billion investment from Apple (AAPL), which seemed to mitigate the president's tariff threats. Harvard University executive fellow and former Medtronic CEO Bill George and Pangaea Policy founder Terry Haines examine what the deal signals about the state of corporate America under Trump and how the president is blurring the lines between government and free-market capitalism. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Catalysts. And Bill, I I want to get your perspective on how you think Jensen Wong has handled the president? Or has he, or has been handled by the president, I guess you could say, um with his various meetings in Washington and sort of trying to finesse things in NVIDIA's direction. Well, he's been very astute at working with President Trump. He's made these concessions. Uh he very very much wants to do more business in China. Intel in the past has done exactly the same thing. Uh I think if they're not giving their latest and greatest technology to the Chinese, it may be okay. I'm very wary about giving American technology to China where we're in a big race, particularly AI technology. But uh I think it's, we'll see. My big concern is this is going to spread not just to semiconductor, it's going to spread to other industries. Will we see in pharma where there's a a pay to play so to speak that the US administration will be taking a share of that because the technology research was done in the US. And I I would be very very concerned about that. We seem to be developing much more of a mercantilist approach to our companies and and walking right up if not crossing over the line to separation between government and free enterprise. That's my biggest concern, Julie. And Bill, you know, even if Terry is right that this this particular type of structure of deal is a one-off, to your point, we have seen a whole host of different flavors of that mercantilist approach that you're talking about. What in your view are the risks of that approach? Well, that we don't have a line between government and capitalism, as you see in many other countries. And I think that's a big concern. How far do you go? The president just advocated not directed the firing of Intel CEO with no evidence that he uh, yes, he has connections in China. So does Tim Cook, so does Elon Musk. But that should not be a prima fascia evidence for firing him. So I see the the CEO of Intel is hustling into the White House today to try to make peace with the president. But how far will this go? That's my concern and how much direction will there be to private industry about how to run this company? We have the golden share of Nippon Steel. And so the president's clearly taking an investment if you will, on behalf of the government in in a lot of industries. And I'm concerned, you know, we're just at the start of this administration. How far is that going to go? And we'll see. And also, the commitments being made, huge. I mean, like Apple, $100 billion on top of $500 billion. Uh enormous in four years. A lot of that won't play out till the end of the administration, but I think these tariffs, no, I think is going to take effect much sooner. And and Terry, you know, sort of what we hear Bill describing there. What are the implications for investors, both in the case of AMD and NVIDIA, but also just sort of the the way that companies need to approach this administration in the future? From an investment perspective, what do people need to think about? Well, take this NVIDIA AMD story with the 15%. Put it to, put it to the side for one second. What you've got though, is a situation where there is much more government direction and aspiration to direct the economy than there was before. The administration has been crystal clear about that. And as a matter of, as a matter of United States policy, as a matter of national security policy. One of Belsen's mantras has been for months that US National Security Policy is United States economic policy. Economic policy is national security policy. You have a situation here where they're doing everything they can, including providing huge incentives to the the manufacturing industry to onshore, to put to use tariffs in part to push different industries to onshore critical materials and and goods and the like. They've done everything short of invoking the Defense Production Act, which would essentially harness industry to government aims. Why are they doing that? Because they're, they are urgent about the nature of the Chinese challenge and how relatively speaking, how little time they think they have to write the ship. Uh and frankly, harness industry to to right size the economy to meet the Chinese challenge. That's what they think. They've been very transparent about that. And I would I would imagine that would continue and frankly, accelerate. Markets continue to be surprised every time they see something happen, like the United States taking an investment in rare earths. But you you can expect a lot more of it. It's not going, it's not, should should not be surprising at all.
