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 2026-09-17, BAC is undervalued at $58, with a DCF intrinsic value of $142 and a margin of safety of 59%. TTWO is undervalued at $210, with an intrinsic value of $326 and a margin of safety of 36%. Of the two, BAC has the wider margin of safety.

BAC
Bank of America Corporation
$57.70
VS
TTWO
Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
$209.50

Rewards

BAC
  • Bank of America Corporation scores 100/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • PEG ratio of 0.90 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.
TTWO
  • Altman Z-Score of 3.62 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 3.05 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • 5 insider sales 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
$1.26B
N/A
FCF Yield
3.21%
13.32
Trailing P/E
N/A
10.90
Forward P/E
20.36
Quality & Moat
4.37%
ROIC
0.42%
11.20%
ROE
-9.04%
0.00%
Gross Margin
57.13%
0.90
PEG Ratio
3.05
Balance Sheet Safety
N/A
Net Debt / Equity
0.31
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
N/A
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.46
2.21%
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
+$11.66B
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
59.4% Margin of Safety
Price is 59.4% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $57.70
Fair Value: $142.10
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
TTWO
35.7% Margin of Safety
Price is 35.7% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $209.50
Fair Value: $325.90
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 $210?

+20.0%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +14.1%

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 7.0%Institutions 71.3%Retail & Other 21.7%
No. of Institutional Holders4,542
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 1.8%Institutions 99.9%
No. of Institutional Holders1,550
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
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
TTWO
5
Sells (3M)
23
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $13.05M
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$361,055
@ $217.37 · 2026-09-03
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$290,563
@ $217.65 · 2026-09-02
SRINIVASAN LAVERNE EVANS
Director
$88,694
@ $245.01 · 2026-08-17
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$31,116
@ $245.01 · 2026-08-17
MOSES JON J
Director
$122,305
@ $244.61 · 2026-06-22
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$1.02M
@ $230.00 · 2026-06-16
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$950,515
@ $215.00 · 2026-06-15
MOSES JON J
Director
$107,608
@ $215.22 · 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
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$535,637
@ $213.57 · 2026-03-02
GORDON WILLIAM BINGHAM
Director
$522,525
@ $209.01 · 2026-03-02
SHERESKY MICHAEL J
Director
$30,183
@ $194.73 · 2026-02-18
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$274,658
@ $248.11 · 2025-12-02
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$399,953
@ $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
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$6.09M
@ $225.22 · 2025-06-02
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$8.95M
@ $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
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$121,885
@ $211.24 · 2025-03-03
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$175,118
@ $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
EMERSON DANIEL P
Officer
$818,545
@ $176.79 · 2024-11-08
GOLDSTEIN LAINIE
Chief Financial Officer
$8.76M
@ $175.05 · 2024-11-08
SRINIVASAN LAVERNE EVANS
Director
$358,340
@ $179.17 · 2024-11-08
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
😐Neutral(53/100)

"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"

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
😨Fear(37/100)

"Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"

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: Neutral (53)
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: Fear (37)
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 59.4% margin of safety (intrinsic value $142 vs. price $58), compared to TTWO's 35.7% margin of safety (intrinsic $326 vs. $210).

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 3.6 (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 4.4% ROIC versus TTWO's 0.4%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.