CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) vs Mastercard Incorporated (MA): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?
As of 2026-08-03, CSGP is overvalued at $29, with a DCF intrinsic value of $1 and a margin of safety of -2037%. MA is fairly valued at $573, with an intrinsic value of $558 and a margin of safety of -3%. Of the two, MA has the wider margin of safety.
Rewards
- ★Gross margin of 78.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
- ★Trailing P/E of 159.8x is 83% below the historical average of 937.7x — potentially undervalued relative to its own history.
- ★PEG ratio of 0.57 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.
- ★Mastercard Incorporated has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
- ★Gross margin of 100.0% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
- ★Mastercard Incorporated scores 99/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
Risks
- ⚠Free cash flow has declined at a 52.6% CAGR over the past 4 years — a concerning trend.
- ⚠High leverage (2.33x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
- ⚠5 insider sales totaling $22.1M with no purchases in the past 3 months — insiders are reducing their exposure.
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 $29?
The market implies +60.0% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.
Standard FCF implies a demanding +12.3%, reflecting heavy growth investment.
What growth rate is the market pricing in at $573?
The market implies +15.1% Owner Earnings growth, roughly in line with history — reasonably priced.
Standard FCF implies +13.4%, reflecting ongoing growth investment.
Economic Moat Score
Learn more →No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.
Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency is the standout factor.
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 pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"
"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"
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: CSGP vs MA
Is CoStar Group, Inc. or Mastercard Incorporated more undervalued in 2026?▼
Based on our discounted cash flow model, MA trades at a -2.7% margin of safety (intrinsic value $558 vs. price $573), compared to CSGP's -2037.1% margin of safety (intrinsic $1 vs. $29).
Which stock has a wider economic moat, CoStar Group, Inc. or Mastercard Incorporated?▼
MA scores 99/100 (Wide moat), while CSGP scores 37/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.
Which company has better free cash flow, CoStar Group, Inc. or Mastercard Incorporated?▼
CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) generates a 3.5% free cash flow yield, compared to Mastercard Incorporated's 3.4%. 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, CoStar Group, Inc. or Mastercard Incorporated?▼
MA earns 56.0% ROIC versus CSGP's 2.5%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.