Compare Stocks › BG vs GS

Bunge Global SA (BG) vs The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-11-01, BG is overvalued at $97, with a DCF intrinsic value of $0 and a margin of safety of -100%. GS is undervalued at $895, with an intrinsic value of $1584 and a margin of safety of 44%. Of the two, GS has the wider margin of safety.

BG
Bunge Global SA
$96.64
VS
GS
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
$894.55

Rewards

BG
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $19.51 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
GS
  • ★Gross margin of 81.3% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • ★Share count has been reduced by 11% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.58 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

Risks

BG
  • ⚠ROIC has declined by 9.6 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • ⚠Gross margin of 5.1% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • ⚠Bunge Global SA scores only 29/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
GS
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.25 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
  • ⚠5 insider sales totaling $12.2M with no purchases in the past 3 months — insiders are reducing their exposure.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
BG
GS
Valuation
$-3.01B
Free Cash Flow
N/A
-16.23%
FCF Yield
N/A
16.60
Trailing P/E
12.86
8.78
Forward P/E
12.07
Quality & Moat
6.16%
ROIC
2.23%
6.92%
ROE
17.75%
5.13%
Gross Margin
81.29%
1.37
PEG Ratio
1.12
Balance Sheet Safety
1.00
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
5.13
Net Debt / EBITDA
N/A
2.98%
Dividend Yield
2.24%
BG: 3Ties: 1GS: 5
BGGS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
BG

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.

GS

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 →
BG
$0.76
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Mediocre Allocator
Σ Retained
$2.98B
Δ Market Cap
+$2.27B
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
GS
$5.60
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$26.00B
Δ Market Cap
+$145.60B
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 →
BG
Insufficient Data
Enter initial FCF to calculate intrinsic value
Current Price: $96.64
Fair Value: $0.00
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
GS
43.5% Margin of Safety
Price is 43.5% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $894.55
Fair Value: $1584.20
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
BG

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

GS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
BG
29/100
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 4 years of fundamental data.
GS
65/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability 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 →
BG
-1.61
Likely 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.
GS
-2.00
Possible 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 →
BG
Insiders 18.4%Institutions 81.5%Retail & Other 0.2%
No. of Institutional Holders1,091
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.
GS
Insiders 0.6%Institutions 75.7%Retail & Other 23.7%
No. of Institutional Holders3,978
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 →
BG
1
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $689,050
MAHONEY CHRISTOPHER
Director
$689,050
@ $106.01 · 2026-08-04
MAHONEY CHRISTOPHER
Director
$408,650
@ $81.73 · 2025-08-18
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
GS
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
HESS JOHN B JR.
Director
$2.00M
@ $511.68 · 2025-04-15
JOHNSON KEVIN RONALD
Director
$1.49M
@ $619.02 · 2025-01-17
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 →
BG
0
Sells (3M)
2
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $2.72M
GARROS JULIO
Chief Operating Officer
$336,889
@ $119.00 · 2026-02-11
DIMOPOULOS CHRISTOS
Officer
$2.39M
@ $94.37 · 2025-11-21
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
GS
5
Sells (3M)
19
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $76.92M
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$229,305
@ $917.22 · 2026-10-28
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$10.93M
@ $910.72 · 2026-10-27
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$222,562
@ $890.25 · 2026-10-22
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$620,280
@ $1033.80 · 2026-08-28
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$184,445
@ $1053.97 · 2026-08-04
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$287,951
@ $1151.80 · 2026-07-15
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$6.68M
@ $973.55 · 2026-05-14
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$13.42M
@ $939.07 · 2026-05-06
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$9.57M
@ $929.17 · 2026-05-01
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$634,927
@ $929.61 · 2026-05-01
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.23M
@ $930.70 · 2026-05-01
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$1.04M
@ $936.18 · 2026-04-23
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$1.02M
@ $919.19 · 2026-04-17
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$10.94M
@ $941.57 · 2026-02-09
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$255,387
@ $938.92 · 2026-01-29
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$2.64M
@ $927.17 · 2026-01-27
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$4.49M
@ $923.75 · 2026-01-23
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$8.89M
@ $927.51 · 2026-01-23
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$1.62M
@ $920.62 · 2026-01-23
WALDRON JOHN E.
President
$13.69M
@ $750.30 · 2025-08-28
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$5.41M
@ $724.40 · 2025-07-25
ROGERS JOHN F W
Officer
$4.31M
@ $717.39 · 2025-07-23
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$4.71M
@ $712.31 · 2025-07-23
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.04M
@ $607.17 · 2025-05-14
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$1.50M
@ $622.15 · 2025-02-26
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$3.31M
@ $636.25 · 2025-01-28
HALIO CAREY
Officer and Treasurer
$2.32M
@ $636.74 · 2025-01-24
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$1.28M
@ $627.01 · 2025-01-21
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$4.76M
@ $634.69 · 2025-01-21
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$965,120
@ $624.67 · 2025-01-21
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$4.00M
@ $610.91 · 2024-11-29
VINIAR DAVID A
Director
$3.06M
@ $612.08 · 2024-11-29
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$1.77M
@ $594.51 · 2024-11-06
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$7.67M
@ $593.03 · 2024-11-06
ROGERS JOHN F W
Officer
$3.83M
@ $596.36 · 2024-11-06
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 →
BG
FearGreed
😨Fear(34/100)

"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.
GS
FearGreed
😐Neutral(48/100)

"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.

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 →
BG
⚪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 (34)
GS
⚪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 (48)
View BG Full AnalysisView GS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: BG vs GS

Is Bunge Global SA or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?▼

Based on our discounted cash flow model, GS trades at a 43.5% margin of safety (intrinsic value $1584 vs. price $895), compared to BG's -100.0% margin of safety (intrinsic $0 vs. $97).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Bunge Global SA or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.?▼

GS scores 65/100 (Narrow moat), while BG scores 29/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. in financial distress?▼

GS's Altman Z-Score of 0.3 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. BG scores 2.7 (Grey 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, Bunge Global SA or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.?▼

BG earns 6.2% ROIC versus GS's 2.2%. 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, Bunge Global SA's or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.'s?▼

GS's dividend earns a safety score of 79/100 (Safe), compared to BG's 60/100 (Safe). GS has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

Does Bunge Global SA have accounting red flags?▼

BG's Beneish M-Score of -1.6 flags it as a likely earnings manipulator (above the -1.78 threshold). By contrast, GS scores -2.0, within the normal range. The Beneish model detects aggressive accounting through eight financial ratios.