Compare StocksCMS vs QCOM

CMS Energy Corporation (CMS) vs QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, CMS is overvalued at $73, with a DCF intrinsic value of $12 and a margin of safety of -515%. QCOM is overvalued at $226, with an intrinsic value of $128 and a margin of safety of -76%. Of the two, QCOM has the wider margin of safety.

CMS
CMS Energy Corporation
$73.38
VS
QCOM
QUALCOMM Incorporated
$226.11

Rewards

CMS
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.38 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
QCOM
  • QUALCOMM Incorporated has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • QUALCOMM Incorporated scores 73/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with reinvestment efficiency as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 23.3% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.

Risks

CMS
  • CMS Energy Corporation scores only 25/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
  • PEG ratio of 2.86 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • High leverage (1.88x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
QCOM
  • FCF yield of 5.4% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • 15 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
CMS
QCOM
Valuation
$-2.16B
Free Cash Flow
$12.82B
-9.51%
FCF Yield
5.38%
20.33
Trailing P/E
24.34
17.59
Forward P/E
21.20
Quality & Moat
4.74%
ROIC
18.22%
10.37%
ROE
36.08%
40.55%
Gross Margin
54.80%
2.86
PEG Ratio
0.91
Balance Sheet Safety
1.88
Net Debt / Equity
0.20
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
6.20
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.42
3.08%
Dividend Yield
1.72%
CMS: 3Ties: 1QCOM: 8
CMSQCOM

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
CMS

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.

QCOM

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 →
CMS
$2.73
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$1.09B
Δ Market Cap
+$2.98B
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
QCOM
$5.06
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$11.96B
Δ Market Cap
+$60.46B
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 →
CMS
514.9% Overvalued
Price is 514.9% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $73.38
Fair Value: $11.93
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
QCOM
178.3% Overvalued
Price is 178.3% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $226.11
Fair Value: $81.25
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
CMS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

QCOM

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $226?

+17.5%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +7.0%

The market implies +17.5% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +7.0%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
CMS
25/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though margin stability 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.
QCOM
73/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by reinvestment efficiency. Revenue Predictability 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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
CMS
-2.43
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.
QCOM
-3.16
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 →
CMS
Insiders 0.6%Institutions 100.5%
No. of Institutional Holders1,127
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.
QCOM
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 84.8%Retail & Other 15.1%
No. of Institutional Holders3,615
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 →
CMS
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $153,398
LEOPOLD DIANE
Director
$153,398
@ $76.70 · 2026-02-25
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
QCOM
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 →
CMS
1
Sells (3M)
7
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $2.40M
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$222,930
@ $74.31 · 2026-05-26
MCINTOSH SCOTT B.
Officer
$136,859
@ $78.21 · 2026-03-02
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$312,940
@ $78.23 · 2026-02-27
RUSSELL JOHN G.
Director
$1.13M
@ $75.75 · 2026-02-20
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$289,882
@ $72.47 · 2025-11-03
SNYDER LAUREN Y
Officer
$158,199
@ $71.26 · 2025-09-05
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$147,246
@ $73.62 · 2025-08-08
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$161,790
@ $73.61 · 2025-05-06
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$147,540
@ $73.77 · 2025-03-03
WRIGHT LAURA H
Director
$174,609
@ $69.84 · 2025-02-19
MCINTOSH SCOTT B.
Officer
$467,392
@ $69.76 · 2025-02-13
RUSSELL JOHN G.
Director
$1.89M
@ $65.85 · 2024-12-19
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$134,443
@ $67.22 · 2024-12-13
MCINTOSH SCOTT B.
Officer
$64,116
@ $68.50 · 2024-11-21
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$136,345
@ $68.17 · 2024-11-18
HOFMEISTER BRANDON J
Officer
$137,709
@ $68.85 · 2024-09-04
RICH BRIAN F
Officer
$263,982
@ $66.00 · 2024-08-01
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
QCOM
3
Sells (3M)
15
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $12.65M
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$493,380
@ $197.35 · 2026-06-11
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$529,741
@ $211.90 · 2026-05-12
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$325,854
@ $130.34 · 2026-04-13
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$330,815
@ $132.33 · 2026-03-12
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$458,799
@ $137.65 · 2026-02-06
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$577,620
@ $173.30 · 2026-01-02
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$2.20M
@ $175.29 · 2025-12-19
ROGERS ALEXANDER H
Officer
$2.83M
@ $178.01 · 2025-12-16
CHAPLIN ANN C
General Counsel
$1.28M
@ $178.03 · 2025-12-16
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$567,702
@ $170.33 · 2025-11-07
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$1.38M
@ $166.06 · 2025-10-20
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$522,808
@ $156.86 · 2025-09-02
MARTIN NEIL A
Officer
$122,463
@ $154.82 · 2025-08-21
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$493,610
@ $148.10 · 2025-08-04
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$537,560
@ $161.28 · 2025-07-02
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$486,965
@ $146.10 · 2025-06-02
MARTIN NEIL A
Officer
$120,808
@ $153.70 · 2025-05-21
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$465,846
@ $139.77 · 2025-05-05
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$91,442
@ $141.11 · 2025-04-09
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$119,900
@ $132.63 · 2025-04-08
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$235,262
@ $132.10 · 2025-04-04
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$523,292
@ $156.82 · 2025-03-03
MARTIN NEIL A
Officer
$130,074
@ $174.83 · 2025-02-21
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$509,397
@ $169.80 · 2025-02-12
ROGERS ALEXANDER H
Officer
$3.28M
@ $169.83 · 2025-02-10
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$463,851
@ $154.62 · 2025-01-02
CHAPLIN ANN C
General Counsel
$409,056
@ $158.12 · 2024-12-16
ROGERS ALEXANDER H
Officer
$1.67M
@ $160.59 · 2024-12-10
CHAPLIN ANN C
General Counsel
$1.24M
@ $160.59 · 2024-12-10
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$484,617
@ $161.54 · 2024-12-05
MARTIN NEIL A
Officer
$202,120
@ $155.00 · 2024-11-21
PALKHIWALA AKASH J
Chief Operating Officer
$491,349
@ $163.78 · 2024-11-14
THOMPSON JAMES H.
Chief Technology Officer
$1.38M
@ $172.09 · 2024-11-08
CHAPLIN ANN C
General Counsel
$313,779
@ $165.06 · 2024-11-04
ROGERS ALEXANDER H
Officer
$539,157
@ $166.15 · 2024-10-02
THOMPSON JAMES H.
Chief Technology Officer
$1.36M
@ $169.80 · 2024-10-01
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 →
CMS
FearGreed
😐Neutral(57/100)

"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.
QCOM
FearGreed
😐Neutral(50/100)

"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 →
CMS
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 (57)
QCOM
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 (50)
View CMS Full AnalysisView QCOM Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: CMS vs QCOM

Is CMS Energy Corporation or QUALCOMM Incorporated more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, QCOM trades at a -76.1% margin of safety (intrinsic value $128 vs. price $226), compared to CMS's -514.9% margin of safety (intrinsic $12 vs. $73).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, CMS Energy Corporation or QUALCOMM Incorporated?

QCOM scores 73/100 (Wide moat), while CMS scores 25/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is CMS Energy Corporation in financial distress?

CMS's Altman Z-Score of 0.9 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. QCOM scores 6.5 (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, CMS Energy Corporation or QUALCOMM Incorporated?

QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) generates a 5.4% free cash flow yield, compared to CMS Energy Corporation's -9.5%. 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, CMS Energy Corporation or QUALCOMM Incorporated?

QCOM earns 18.2% ROIC versus CMS's 4.7%. 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, CMS Energy Corporation's or QUALCOMM Incorporated's?

QCOM's dividend earns a safety score of 84/100 (Very Safe), compared to CMS's 69/100 (Safe). QCOM has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.