Compare StocksCRM vs UNP

Salesforce, Inc. (CRM) vs Union Pacific Corporation (UNP): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-08-03, CRM is undervalued at $184, with a DCF intrinsic value of $222981480055 and a margin of safety of 100%. UNP is overvalued at $292, with an intrinsic value of $215 and a margin of safety of -36%. Of the two, CRM has the wider margin of safety.

CRM
Salesforce, Inc.
$184.02
VS
UNP
Union Pacific Corporation
$292.13

Rewards

CRM
  • Gross margin of 77.6% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 31.6% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $5.53 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
UNP
  • Union Pacific Corporation has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
  • Union Pacific Corporation scores 80/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with margin stability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Return on equity has consistently exceeded 20% over 4 years, indicating efficient use of shareholder capital.

Risks

CRM
  • Altman Z-Score of 0.81 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
UNP
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has produced only $0.15 of earning power — shareholders may have been better served by dividends.
  • FCF yield of 2.7% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • PEG ratio of 3.23 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
CRM
UNP
Valuation
$16.55B
Free Cash Flow
$4.72B
N/A
FCF Yield
2.72%
21.32
Trailing P/E
23.64
11.86
Forward P/E
20.69
Quality & Moat
9.61%
ROIC
15.87%
16.91%
ROE
39.70%
77.64%
Gross Margin
56.28%
0.76
PEG Ratio
3.23
Balance Sheet Safety
0.90
Net Debt / Equity
1.41
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.38
Net Debt / EBITDA
2.26
0.96%
Dividend Yield
1.94%
CRM: 6Ties: 1UNP: 4
CRMUNP

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
CRM

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.

UNP

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 →
CRM
$-0.00
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$14.67B
Δ Market Cap
$-79.12
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
UNP
$0.98
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Mediocre Allocator
Σ Retained
$10.64B
Δ Market Cap
+$10.42B
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 →
CRM
100.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 100.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $184.02
Fair Value: $222981480055.14
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
UNP
35.6% Overvalued
Price is 35.6% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $292.13
Fair Value: $215.49
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
CRM

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $184?

-21.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies -30.0%

The market implies -21.2% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding -30.0%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

UNP

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $292?

+12.5%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +18.1%

The market implies +12.5% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +18.1%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
CRM
58/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with revenue predictability as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency 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.
UNP
80/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by margin stability. Reinvestment Efficiency 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 →
CRM
-2.73
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.
UNP
-2.61
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 →
CRM
Insiders 3.0%Institutions 93.8%Retail & Other 3.2%
No. of Institutional Holders3,568
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.
UNP
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 90.8%Retail & Other 9.2%
No. of Institutional Holders3,523
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 →
CRM
0
Buys (3M)
4
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $26.52M
ALBER LAURA
Director
$500,266
@ $194.58 · 2026-03-19
KIRK DAVID BLAIR
Director
$500,178
@ $194.62 · 2026-03-18
KIRK DAVID BLAIR
Director
$500,722
@ $258.64 · 2025-12-17
MORFIT G MASON
Director and Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$25.02M
@ $260.58 · 2025-12-05
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
UNP
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 →
CRM
0
Sells (3M)
15
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $40.30M
KROES NEELIE
Director
$929,276
@ $238.70 · 2026-01-14
HARRIS G PARKER
Officer and Director
$31.61M
@ $234.70 · 2025-12-02
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$575,140
@ $255.62 · 2025-10-23
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$590,102
@ $262.27 · 2025-10-21
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$567,631
@ $252.28 · 2025-10-20
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$550,430
@ $244.64 · 2025-10-17
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$558,810
@ $248.36 · 2025-10-16
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$536,322
@ $238.37 · 2025-10-15
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$548,796
@ $243.91 · 2025-10-14
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$1.10M
@ $244.75 · 2025-10-13
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$547,344
@ $243.26 · 2025-10-09
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$539,533
@ $239.79 · 2025-10-08
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$555,001
@ $246.67 · 2025-09-23
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$552,798
@ $245.69 · 2025-09-19
BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
Chief Executive Officer
$545,384
@ $242.39 · 2025-09-15
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
UNP
1
Sells (3M)
4
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $9.25M
GEHRINGER ERIC J.
Officer
$789,504
@ $263.96 · 2026-06-03
ROCKER KENYATTA G.
Officer
$7.44M
@ $271.76 · 2026-04-24
HAMANN JENNIFER L
Chief Financial Officer
$549,400
@ $274.70 · 2026-04-24
GEHRINGER ERIC J.
Officer
$469,625
@ $234.93 · 2026-03-20
RICHARDSON CRAIG V
Officer
$1.64M
@ $252.00 · 2025-01-27
WHITED ELIZABETH F.
President
$1.88M
@ $250.00 · 2025-01-24
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 →
CRM
FearGreed
😨Fear(39/100)

"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.
UNP
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 →
CRM
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 (39)
UNP
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 CRM Full AnalysisView UNP Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: CRM vs UNP

Is Salesforce, Inc. or Union Pacific Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, CRM trades at a 100.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $222981480055 vs. price $184), compared to UNP's -35.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $215 vs. $292).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Salesforce, Inc. or Union Pacific Corporation?

UNP scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while CRM scores 58/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Salesforce, Inc. in financial distress?

CRM's Altman Z-Score of 0.8 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. UNP scores 3.8 (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 stock has higher return on invested capital, Salesforce, Inc. or Union Pacific Corporation?

UNP earns 15.9% ROIC versus CRM's 9.6%. 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, Salesforce, Inc.'s or Union Pacific Corporation's?

UNP's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to CRM's 88/100 (Very Safe). UNP has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

CRM vs UNP: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io