Compare StocksBRK-B vs GLW

Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK-B) vs Corning Incorporated (GLW): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, BRK-B is undervalued at $489, with a DCF intrinsic value of $644 and a margin of safety of 24%. GLW is overvalued at $195, with an intrinsic value of $137 and a margin of safety of -42%. Of the two, BRK-B has the wider margin of safety.

BRK-B
Berkshire Hathaway Inc.
$489.46
VS
GLW
Corning Incorporated
$194.92

Rewards

BRK-B
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $3.95 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
  • Net debt/EBITDA of -2.3x means the company holds more cash than debt — a net cash position.
GLW
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 11.8% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Altman Z-Score of 4.04 indicates very low bankruptcy risk — the company is firmly in the safe zone.

Risks

BRK-B
  • FCF yield of 5.8% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • PEG ratio of 10.06 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
GLW
  • Despite buyback spending, shares outstanding increased in 3 out of 4 years — stock-based compensation is offsetting repurchases.
  • FCF yield of 0.8% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • Trailing P/E of 98.9x is 106% above the historical average of 48.0x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
BRK-B
GLW
Valuation
$61.23B
Free Cash Flow
$1.41B
5.80%
FCF Yield
0.84%
14.56
Trailing P/E
98.94
22.79
Forward P/E
46.55
Quality & Moat
4.96%
ROIC
9.07%
10.50%
ROE
16.74%
27.78%
Gross Margin
36.38%
10.06
PEG Ratio
1.39
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
0.66
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-2.28
Net Debt / EBITDA
2.09
0.00%
Dividend Yield
0.63%
BRK-B: 6Ties: 1GLW: 5
BRK-BGLW

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
BRK-B

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.

GLW

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 →
BRK-B
$1.66
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Value Creator
Σ Retained
$252.19B
Δ Market Cap
+$417.89B
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
GLW
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-291.0M
Δ Market Cap
+$48.78B
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 →
BRK-B
24.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 24.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $489.46
Fair Value: $643.73
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
GLW
42.2% Overvalued
Price is 42.2% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $194.92
Fair Value: $137.10
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
BRK-B

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $489?

+0.4%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +1.6%

The market implies +0.4% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +1.6%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

GLW

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $195?

+30.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +33.1%

The market implies +30.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +33.1%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

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

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving revenue predictability 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.
GLW
36/100
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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
BRK-B
-2.41
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.
GLW
-2.38
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 →
BRK-B
Insiders 0.3%Institutions 67.3%Retail & Other 32.4%
No. of Institutional Holders5,905
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.
GLW
Insiders 8.2%Institutions 73.8%Retail & Other 18.1%
No. of Institutional Holders2,760
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 →
BRK-B
1
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $250,545
O'SULLIVAN MICHAEL J
General Counsel
$250,545
@ $467.43 · 2026-05-06
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
GLW
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 →
BRK-B
0
Sells (3M)
0
Sells (12M)
No open market insider sales found.
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
GLW
12
Sells (3M)
38
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $103.11M
WEEKS WENDELL P.
Chief Executive Officer
$18.65M
@ $186.46 · 2026-06-09
AMIN JAYMIN
Chief Technology Officer
$5.26M
@ $192.14 · 2026-05-22
NELSON AVERY H III
Chief Operating Officer
$3.92M
@ $195.93 · 2026-05-15
VERKLEEREN RONALD L
Officer
$2.08M
@ $207.77 · 2026-05-13
SEETHARAM SOUMYA
Chief Technology Officer
$4.12M
@ $206.23 · 2026-05-11
TILLMAN MICHAUNE D.
General Counsel
$674,870
@ $207.02 · 2026-05-11
ZHANG JOHN Z
Officer
$1.98M
@ $198.34 · 2026-05-11
BECKER STEFAN
Officer
$3.95M
@ $188.08 · 2026-05-08
GULLO MICHELLE L
Officer
$1.00M
@ $189.03 · 2026-05-08
STEVERSON LEWIS A
Officer
$5.44M
@ $196.06 · 2026-05-08
SCHLESINGER EDWARD A
Chief Financial Officer
$4.20M
@ $186.08 · 2026-05-07
ZHANG JOHN Z
Officer
$2.77M
@ $184.67 · 2026-05-06
ZHANG JOHN Z
Officer
$204,765
@ $133.75 · 2026-02-12
NELSON AVERY H III
Chief Operating Officer
$203,800
@ $128.74 · 2026-02-11
STEVERSON LEWIS A
Officer
$2.00M
@ $130.22 · 2026-02-10
NELSON AVERY H III
Chief Operating Officer
$812,722
@ $129.79 · 2026-02-09
KAMMERUD JORDANA DARYL
Officer
$3.83M
@ $127.67 · 2026-02-09
MUSSER ERIC S.
Retired
$1.95M
@ $130.25 · 2026-02-09
FANG LI
Officer
$1.11M
@ $113.51 · 2026-02-04
O'DAY MICHAEL PAUL
Officer
$558,232
@ $110.52 · 2026-02-02
MUSSER ERIC S.
Retired
$2.75M
@ $110.00 · 2026-02-02
SCHLESINGER EDWARD A
Chief Financial Officer
$2.21M
@ $104.55 · 2026-01-29
SEETHARAM SOUMYA
Chief Technology Officer
$1.50M
@ $90.78 · 2025-12-10
VERKLEEREN RONALD L
Officer
$1.99M
@ $94.69 · 2025-12-10
SCHLESINGER EDWARD A
Chief Financial Officer
$1.91M
@ $91.25 · 2025-10-31
STEVERSON LEWIS A
Officer
$2.06M
@ $89.05 · 2025-10-31
BECKER STEFAN
Officer
$1.10M
@ $91.28 · 2025-10-29
MUSSER ERIC S.
Retired
$9.02M
@ $90.17 · 2025-10-29
AMIN JAYMIN
Chief Technology Officer
$1.37M
@ $77.18 · 2025-09-17
MUSSER ERIC S.
President
$1.40M
@ $70.23 · 2025-09-04
ZHANG JOHN Z
Officer
$79,425
@ $65.53 · 2025-08-12
MUSSER ERIC S.
President
$1.23M
@ $65.31 · 2025-08-11
MUSSER ERIC S.
President
$1.32M
@ $65.88 · 2025-08-07
WEEKS WENDELL P.
Chief Executive Officer
$5.35M
@ $65.19 · 2025-08-07
NELSON AVERY H III
Chief Operating Officer
$2.26M
@ $62.26 · 2025-07-30
O'DAY MICHAEL PAUL
Officer
$927,912
@ $62.36 · 2025-07-30
SCHLESINGER EDWARD A
Chief Financial Officer
$877,013
@ $62.28 · 2025-07-30
STEVERSON LEWIS A
Officer
$1.04M
@ $62.22 · 2025-07-30
VERKLEEREN RONALD L
Officer
$1.01M
@ $50.52 · 2025-06-11
MUSSER ERIC S.
President
$1.02M
@ $51.11 · 2025-06-06
SCHLESINGER EDWARD A
Chief Financial Officer
$222,534
@ $49.85 · 2025-06-02
BECKER STEFAN
Officer
$849,838
@ $49.68 · 2025-05-29
SEETHARAM SOUMYA
Chief Technology Officer
$325,285
@ $50.01 · 2025-05-29
SEETHARAM SOUMYA
Chief Technology Officer
$715,797
@ $50.01 · 2025-05-28
ZHANG JOHN Z
Officer
$473,679
@ $49.29 · 2025-05-28
ZHANG JOHN Z
Officer
$375,294
@ $46.91 · 2025-05-12
BELL MICHAEL ALAN
Retired
$892,768
@ $44.06 · 2025-04-30
WEEKS WENDELL P.
Chief Executive Officer
$5.01M
@ $50.08 · 2025-02-28
SCHLESINGER EDWARD A
Chief Financial Officer
$218,518
@ $52.82 · 2025-02-19
ZHANG JOHN Z
Officer
$744,757
@ $52.78 · 2025-02-18
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 →
BRK-B
FearGreed
😏Greed(65/100)

"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.
GLW
FearGreed
😐Neutral(59/100)

"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 →
BRK-B
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 (65)
GLW
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 (59)
View BRK-B Full AnalysisView GLW Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: BRK-B vs GLW

Is Berkshire Hathaway Inc. or Corning Incorporated more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, BRK-B trades at a 24.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $644 vs. price $489), compared to GLW's -42.2% margin of safety (intrinsic $137 vs. $195).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Berkshire Hathaway Inc. or Corning Incorporated?

BRK-B scores 40/100 (Narrow moat), while GLW scores 36/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Berkshire Hathaway Inc. in financial distress?

BRK-B's Altman Z-Score of 2.5 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. GLW scores 4.0 (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 company has better free cash flow, Berkshire Hathaway Inc. or Corning Incorporated?

Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK-B) generates a 5.8% free cash flow yield, compared to Corning Incorporated's 0.8%. A higher FCF yield means the business converts more of its market value into cash that can be returned to shareholders or reinvested.

Which stock has higher return on invested capital, Berkshire Hathaway Inc. or Corning Incorporated?

GLW earns 9.1% ROIC versus BRK-B's 5.0%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.