ConocoPhillips (COP) vs Netflix, Inc. (NFLX): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?
As of 2026-08-06, COP is fairly valued at $115, with a DCF intrinsic value of $113 and a margin of safety of -2%. NFLX is undervalued at $74, with an intrinsic value of $127 and a margin of safety of 42%. Of the two, NFLX has the wider margin of safety.
Rewards
- ★Netflix, Inc. has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
- ★Netflix, Inc. scores 85/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
- ★Free cash flow has grown at a 80.1% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
Risks
- ⚠ROIC has declined by 17.9 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
- ⚠Buybacks have been poorly timed — 3 out of 4 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
- ⚠FCF yield of 5.2% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
- ⚠Buybacks have been poorly timed — 2 out of 3 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
- ⚠Insiders have sold $36.0M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.
Key Valuation Metrics
Learn more →Historical Fundamentals
Learn more →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.
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 →> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
> $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 →Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth
Learn more →What growth rate is the market pricing in at $115?
The market implies +7.5% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.
Standard FCF implies a demanding +8.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment.
What growth rate is the market pricing in at $74?
The market implies +0.3% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.
Standard FCF implies a more demanding +1.2%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.
Economic Moat Score
Learn more →No durable moat detected, though roic consistency shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.
Wide moat driven primarily by roic consistency. Margin Stability is the area most vulnerable to competitive pressure.
Forensic Accounting
Learn more →M-Score Trend
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.
Ownership Breakdown
Learn more →High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
Insider Buying Activity
Learn more →Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.
Insider Selling Activity
Learn more →Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.
🎭 Mr. Market's Mood
Learn more →"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"
"Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"
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 →The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
Frequently Asked Questions: COP vs NFLX
Is ConocoPhillips or Netflix, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?▼
Based on our discounted cash flow model, NFLX trades at a 41.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $127 vs. price $74), compared to COP's -1.8% margin of safety (intrinsic $113 vs. $115).
Which stock has a wider economic moat, ConocoPhillips or Netflix, Inc.?▼
NFLX scores 85/100 (Wide moat), while COP scores 38/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.
Is ConocoPhillips in financial distress?▼
COP's Altman Z-Score of 2.8 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. NFLX scores 10.9 (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, ConocoPhillips or Netflix, Inc.?▼
Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) generates a 8.2% free cash flow yield, compared to ConocoPhillips's 5.2%. 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, ConocoPhillips or Netflix, Inc.?▼
NFLX earns 27.3% ROIC versus COP's 11.8%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.