Compare StocksCOP vs COST

ConocoPhillips (COP) vs Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, COP is fairly valued at $108, with a DCF intrinsic value of $113 and a margin of safety of 5%. COST is overvalued at $951, with an intrinsic value of $451 and a margin of safety of -111%. Of the two, COP has the wider margin of safety.

COP
ConocoPhillips
$107.74
VS
COST
Costco Wholesale Corporation
$951.45

Rewards

COP
  • PEG ratio of 0.94 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.
COST
  • Costco Wholesale Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Costco Wholesale Corporation scores 96/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 30.8% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.

Risks

COP
  • 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 5.5% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
COST
  • Gross margin of 12.9% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • Despite buyback spending, shares outstanding increased in 3 out of 4 years — stock-based compensation is offsetting repurchases.
  • FCF yield of 1.6% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
COP
COST
Valuation
$7.24B
Free Cash Flow
$6.95B
5.52%
FCF Yield
1.65%
18.26
Trailing P/E
47.98
11.72
Forward P/E
42.05
Quality & Moat
11.77%
ROIC
31.32%
11.28%
ROE
29.15%
45.59%
Gross Margin
12.88%
0.94
PEG Ratio
4.82
Balance Sheet Safety
0.26
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
0.73
Net Debt / EBITDA
-0.07
3.02%
Dividend Yield
0.60%
COP: 6Ties: 2COST: 4
COPCOST

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
COP

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.

COST

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 →
COP
$-1.99
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$14.97B
Δ Market Cap
$-29.73B
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
COST
$19.41
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$9.28B
Δ Market Cap
+$180.14B
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 →
COP
24.6% Overvalued
Price is 24.6% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $107.74
Fair Value: $86.45
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
COST
110.9% Overvalued
Price is 110.9% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $951.45
Fair Value: $451.13
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
COP

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $108?

+6.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +8.0%

The market implies +6.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +8.0%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

COST

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $951?

+20.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +22.8%

The market implies +20.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +22.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
COP
38/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though roic consistency 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.
COST
96/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency is the standout factor.

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 →
COP
-2.89
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.
COST
-2.65
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 →
COP
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 87.6%Retail & Other 12.3%
No. of Institutional Holders3,171
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.
COST
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 73.8%Retail & Other 26.0%
No. of Institutional Holders5,187
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 →
COP
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $500,000
MCRAVEN WILLIAM H.
Director
$500,000
@ $86.69 · 2025-11-10
JOHNSON KIRK L
Officer
$499,472
@ $94.24 · 2025-06-16
MURTI ARJUN N
Director
$239,675
@ $95.87 · 2024-12-20
WALKER R A
Director
$1.02M
@ $97.80 · 2024-12-17
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
COST
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 →
COP
3
Sells (3M)
12
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $127.52M
MULLIGAN SHARMILA
Director
$234,906
@ $119.00 · 2026-06-10
ROSE KELLY BRUNETTI
General Counsel
$1.00M
@ $130.03 · 2026-03-24
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$888,651
@ $127.06 · 2026-03-23
LANCE RYAN MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$64.49M
@ $127.26 · 2026-03-20
HRAP HEATHER G.
Officer
$317,631
@ $119.68 · 2026-03-13
LUNDQUIST ANDREW D
Officer
$4.13M
@ $119.68 · 2026-03-13
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$1.73M
@ $119.36 · 2026-03-12
HAYNES-WELSH KONTESSA S.
Officer
$1.24M
@ $120.07 · 2026-03-12
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$1.41M
@ $116.37 · 2026-03-11
ROSE KELLY BRUNETTI
General Counsel
$1.00M
@ $118.04 · 2026-03-09
LEACH TIMOTHY ALLEN
Director
$4.75M
@ $118.79 · 2026-03-06
LANCE RYAN MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$46.32M
@ $92.50 · 2025-12-19
LEACH TIMOTHY ALLEN
Director
$6.00M
@ $108.11 · 2024-08-13
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
COST
1
Sells (3M)
12
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $18.18M
FRATES CATON
Officer
$695,100
@ $993.00 · 2026-04-01
ADAMO CLAUDINE
Officer
$732,205
@ $1003.02 · 2026-03-09
JONES TERESA A
Officer
$838,318
@ $986.26 · 2026-01-21
DECKER SUSAN LYNNE
Director
$437,390
@ $955.00 · 2026-01-16
KLAUER JAMES C
Officer
$1.41M
@ $939.00 · 2026-01-14
POLIT JAVIER
Officer
$2.26M
@ $866.38 · 2025-12-30
WILCOX WILLIAM RICHARD
Officer
$2.23M
@ $930.13 · 2025-11-07
ADAMO CLAUDINE
Officer
$2.53M
@ $935.68 · 2025-10-24
BARBRE TIFFANY MARIE
Divisional Officer
$1.16M
@ $934.91 · 2025-10-24
FRATES CATON
Officer
$1.40M
@ $910.02 · 2025-09-29
JONES TERESA A
Officer
$595,230
@ $992.05 · 2025-08-20
RUBANENKO YORAM B.
Officer
$3.90M
@ $974.96 · 2025-07-14
DECKER SUSAN LYNNE
Director
$536,058
@ $980.00 · 2025-06-18
CALLANS PATRICK J
Officer
$3.01M
@ $1002.77 · 2025-06-09
RIEL PIERRE
Officer
$2.03M
@ $1014.15 · 2025-06-06
KLAUER JAMES C
Officer
$3.92M
@ $981.07 · 2025-04-17
MILLERCHIP GARY
Officer
$1.03M
@ $940.01 · 2025-03-27
ADAMO CLAUDINE
Officer
$830,304
@ $922.56 · 2025-03-24
FRATES CATON
Officer
$765,213
@ $900.25 · 2025-03-18
VACHRIS ROLAND MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$3.35M
@ $931.00 · 2025-03-11
GALANTI RICHARD ALAN
Officer and Director
$1.27M
@ $894.97 · 2024-10-24
JONES TERESA A
Officer
$717,236
@ $896.54 · 2024-10-23
RIEL PIERRE
Officer
$1.79M
@ $896.71 · 2024-10-15
CALLANS PATRICK J
Officer
$2.23M
@ $893.94 · 2024-09-30
ADAMO CLAUDINE
Officer
$2.84M
@ $888.99 · 2024-09-30
FRATES CATON
Officer
$1.50M
@ $883.35 · 2024-09-30
GALANTI RICHARD ALAN
Officer and Director
$868,962
@ $868.96 · 2024-08-15
DECKER SUSAN LYNNE
Director
$543,430
@ $876.50 · 2024-08-15
JONES TERESA A
Officer
$3,330
@ $832.50 · 2024-07-25
HINES DANIEL M
Officer
$2.54M
@ $846.37 · 2024-07-15
DENMAN KENNETH D
Director
$298,036
@ $851.53 · 2024-07-15
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 →
COP
FearGreed
😐Neutral(46/100)

"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.
COST
FearGreed
😐Neutral(52/100)

"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 →
COP
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 (46)
COST
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 (52)
View COP Full AnalysisView COST Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: COP vs COST

Is ConocoPhillips or Costco Wholesale Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, COP trades at a 4.7% margin of safety (intrinsic value $113 vs. price $108), compared to COST's -110.9% margin of safety (intrinsic $451 vs. $951).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, ConocoPhillips or Costco Wholesale Corporation?

COST scores 96/100 (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. COST scores 9.2 (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 Costco Wholesale Corporation?

ConocoPhillips (COP) generates a 5.5% free cash flow yield, compared to Costco Wholesale Corporation's 1.6%. 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 Costco Wholesale Corporation?

COST earns 31.3% 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.

Which dividend is safer, ConocoPhillips's or Costco Wholesale Corporation's?

COST's dividend earns a safety score of 85/100 (Very Safe), compared to COP's 78/100 (Safe). COST has raised its dividend for 0 consecutive years.