Compare StocksBAC vs UHS

Bank of America Corporation (BAC) vs Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, BAC is undervalued at $56, with a DCF intrinsic value of $133 and a margin of safety of 58%. UHS is undervalued at $141, with an intrinsic value of $465 and a margin of safety of 70%. Of the two, UHS has the wider margin of safety.

BAC
Bank of America Corporation
$56.20
VS
UHS
Universal Health Services, Inc.
$141.17

Rewards

BAC
  • Bank of America Corporation scores 100/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
UHS
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 46.5% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Share count has been reduced by 14% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.83 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

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.
UHS
  • FCF yield of 7.6% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
BAC
UHS
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$650.82M
N/A
FCF Yield
7.62%
13.95
Trailing P/E
5.90
11.13
Forward P/E
5.57
Quality & Moat
3.89%
ROIC
12.33%
10.64%
ROE
21.37%
0.00%
Gross Margin
44.23%
1.02
PEG Ratio
1.02
Balance Sheet Safety
N/A
Net Debt / Equity
0.66
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
N/A
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.88
1.97%
Dividend Yield
0.54%
BAC: 1Ties: 2UHS: 5
BACUHS

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.

UHS

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.

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
UHS
$1.05
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Value Creator
Σ Retained
$3.19B
Δ Market Cap
+$3.36B
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
UHS
69.6% Margin of Safety
Price is 69.6% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $141.17
Fair Value: $465.09
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
BAC

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

UHS

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $141?

-3.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +8.3%

The market implies -3.2% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +8.3%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

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.
UHS
66/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with revenue predictability as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency would strengthen the moat.

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.

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.
UHS
-2.44
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.

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.
UHS
Insiders 4.8%Institutions 101.4%
No. of Institutional Holders916
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
UHS
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
SCRIVENER THOMAS M
Officer
$2.49M
@ $49.82 · 2026-03-05
BRONSTEIN SHERI B
Officer
$2.99M
@ $49.91 · 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
UHS
0
Sells (3M)
3
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $1.20M
SUSSMAN ELLIOT J
Director
$128,099
@ $190.06 · 2026-03-13
NIMETZ WARREN J.
Director
$852,343
@ $223.30 · 2025-11-11
SUSSMAN ELLIOT J
Director
$217,799
@ $225.70 · 2025-10-29
SINGER MARIA RUDERMAN
Director
$210,053
@ $191.48 · 2025-05-14
SINGER MARIA RUDERMAN
Director
$179,161
@ $179.16 · 2025-03-10
SINGER MARIA RUDERMAN
Director
$308,516
@ $191.15 · 2024-12-11
SUSSMAN ELLIOT J
Director
$375,534
@ $218.08 · 2024-08-13
NIMETZ WARREN J.
Director
$749,552
@ $217.64 · 2024-08-12
CHEN-LANGENMAYR NINA
Director
$180,294
@ $212.11 · 2024-08-07
SUSSMAN ELLIOT J
Director
$533,616
@ $210.00 · 2024-07-26
MCDONNELL EILEEN C.
Director
$531,211
@ $209.55 · 2024-07-26
PETERSON MATTHEW JAY
Officer
$3.19M
@ $210.85 · 2024-07-26
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.
UHS
FearGreed
😨Fear(31/100)

"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: Greed (74)
UHS
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 (31)
View BAC Full AnalysisView UHS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: BAC vs UHS

Is Bank of America Corporation or Universal Health Services, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, UHS trades at a 69.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $465 vs. price $141), compared to BAC's 57.9% margin of safety (intrinsic $133 vs. $56).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Bank of America Corporation or Universal Health Services, Inc.?

BAC scores 100/100 (Wide moat), while UHS scores 66/100 (Narrow 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. UHS scores 3.3 (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 Universal Health Services, Inc.?

UHS earns 12.3% ROIC versus BAC's 3.9%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Which dividend is safer, Bank of America Corporation's or Universal Health Services, Inc.'s?

UHS's dividend earns a safety score of 88/100 (Very Safe), compared to BAC's 79/100 (Safe). UHS has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.