Compare StocksBAC vs TTWO

Bank of America Corporation (BAC) vs Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (TTWO): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-21, BAC is undervalued at $56, with a DCF intrinsic value of $133 and a margin of safety of 58%. TTWO is undervalued at $239, with an intrinsic value of $329 and a margin of safety of 27%. Of the two, BAC has the wider margin of safety.

BAC
Bank of America Corporation
$56.20
VS
TTWO
Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
$239.28

Rewards

BAC
  • Bank of America Corporation scores 100/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
TTWO
  • Altman Z-Score of 4.18 indicates very low bankruptcy risk — the company is firmly in the safe zone.

Risks

BAC
  • Gross margin of 0.0% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • Altman Z-Score of 0.22 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
TTWO
  • PEG ratio of 3.34 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • 8 insider sales totaling $9.0M with no purchases in the past 3 months — insiders are reducing their exposure.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
BAC
TTWO
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$1.45B
N/A
FCF Yield
3.26%
13.95
Trailing P/E
N/A
11.13
Forward P/E
23.72
Quality & Moat
3.89%
ROIC
1.89%
10.64%
ROE
-10.56%
0.00%
Gross Margin
57.67%
1.00
PEG Ratio
3.34
Balance Sheet Safety
N/A
Net Debt / Equity
0.28
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
N/A
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.23
1.99%
Dividend Yield
0.00%
BAC: 5Ties: 1TTWO: 1
BACTTWO

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
BAC

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.

TTWO
No data available for this metric.

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 →
BAC
$2.37
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$55.63B
Δ Market Cap
+$131.83B
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
TTWO
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-8.52B
Δ Market Cap
+$17.18B
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

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 →
BAC
57.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 57.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $56.20
Fair Value: $133.45
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
TTWO
27.3% Margin of Safety
Price is 27.3% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $239.28
Fair Value: $329.01
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
BAC

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

TTWO

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $239?

+21.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +13.8%

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
BAC
100/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. Reinvestment Efficiency is the area most vulnerable to competitive pressure.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.
TTWO
39/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though reinvestment efficiency shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 5 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
BAC
-2.31
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

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.
TTWO

Insufficient data for Beneish M-Score calculation (requires 2+ years).

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 →
BAC
Insiders 7.3%Institutions 70.6%Retail & Other 22.0%
No. of Institutional Holders4,373
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
TTWO
Insiders 1.4%Institutions 93.9%Retail & Other 4.8%
No. of Institutional Holders1,488
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

Insider Buying Activity

Learn more →
BAC
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
TTWO
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises

Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.

Insider Selling Activity

Learn more →
BAC
0
Sells (3M)
5
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $20.17M
MENSAH BERNARD AMPONSAH
Officer
$4.41M
@ $46.94 · 2026-03-12
BRONSTEIN SHERI B
Officer
$2.99M
@ $49.91 · 2026-03-05
SCRIVENER THOMAS M
Officer
$2.49M
@ $49.82 · 2026-03-05
ATHANASIA DEAN C
President
$6.86M
@ $50.21 · 2026-03-03
BORTHWICK ALASTAIR M.
Chief Financial Officer
$3.42M
@ $50.24 · 2026-02-27
MENSAH BERNARD AMPONSAH
Officer
$3.66M
@ $39.80 · 2024-08-27
HANS LINDSAY D
Officer
$402,410
@ $36.91 · 2024-08-05
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
TTWO
8
Sells (3M)
28
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $39.83M
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$1.02M
@ $230.00 · 2026-06-16
MOSES JON J
Director
$107,608
@ $215.22 · 2026-06-15
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$950,515
@ $215.00 · 2026-06-15
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$1.89M
@ $214.00 · 2026-06-08
DORNEMANN MICHAEL
Director
$249,790
@ $217.02 · 2026-06-04
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$4.63M
@ $219.61 · 2026-06-02
SRINIVASAN LAVERNE EVANS
Director
$85,548
@ $229.35 · 2026-06-01
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$28,592
@ $218.26 · 2026-05-29
GORDON WILLIAM BINGHAM
Director
$521,725
@ $208.69 · 2026-03-09
DORNEMANN MICHAEL
Director
$296,195
@ $213.09 · 2026-03-05
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$248,906
@ $213.47 · 2026-03-02
GORDON WILLIAM BINGHAM
Director
$522,525
@ $209.01 · 2026-03-02
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$535,637
@ $213.57 · 2026-03-02
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$30,183
@ $194.73 · 2026-02-18
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$399,953
@ $248.11 · 2025-12-02
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$274,658
@ $248.11 · 2025-12-02
SRINIVASAN LAVERNE EVANS
Director
$321,664
@ $238.27 · 2025-11-18
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$42,790
@ $235.11 · 2025-11-17
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$2.50M
@ $250.00 · 2025-09-08
MOSES JON J
Director
$239,570
@ $239.57 · 2025-09-04
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$474,110
@ $238.73 · 2025-09-03
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$2.77M
@ $239.57 · 2025-09-02
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$4.61M
@ $230.64 · 2025-08-28
SLATOFF KARL
President
$11.16M
@ $227.68 · 2025-08-21
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$5.11M
@ $227.47 · 2025-08-21
SRINIVASAN LAVERNE EVANS
Director
$528,868
@ $227.47 · 2025-08-21
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$46,227
@ $233.47 · 2025-08-18
MOSES JON J
Director
$231,330
@ $231.33 · 2025-08-15
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$8.95M
@ $225.22 · 2025-06-02
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$6.09M
@ $225.22 · 2025-06-02
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$45,106
@ $225.53 · 2025-06-02
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$37,057
@ $214.20 · 2025-03-06
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$175,118
@ $211.24 · 2025-03-03
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$121,885
@ $211.24 · 2025-03-03
SLATOFF KARL
President
$7.02M
@ $208.13 · 2025-02-25
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$262,197
@ $187.95 · 2024-12-03
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$212,221
@ $187.64 · 2024-12-02
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$8.76M
@ $175.05 · 2024-11-08
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$818,545
@ $176.79 · 2024-11-08
SRINIVASAN LAVERNE EVANS
Director
$358,340
@ $179.17 · 2024-11-08
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$182,177
@ $158.14 · 2024-09-03
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$124,931
@ $158.14 · 2024-09-03
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$28,618
@ $149.83 · 2024-08-19
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives

Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.

🎭 Mr. Market's Mood

Learn more →
BAC
FearGreed
😏Greed(74/100)

"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.
TTWO
FearGreed
😏Greed(61/100)

"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

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 →
BAC
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Greed (74)
TTWO
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Greed (61)
View BAC Full AnalysisView TTWO Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: BAC vs TTWO

Is Bank of America Corporation or Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, BAC trades at a 57.9% margin of safety (intrinsic value $133 vs. price $56), compared to TTWO's 27.3% margin of safety (intrinsic $329 vs. $239).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Bank of America Corporation or Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.?

BAC scores 100/100 (Wide moat), while TTWO scores 39/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Bank of America Corporation in financial distress?

BAC's Altman Z-Score of 0.2 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. TTWO scores 4.2 (Safe zone). The Altman Z-Score is a five-factor model that predicts insolvency within two years; scores below 1.81 indicate significant distress.

Which stock has higher return on invested capital, Bank of America Corporation or Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.?

BAC earns 3.9% ROIC versus TTWO's 1.9%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.