Compare Stocks › CTVA vs MSFT

Corteva, Inc. (CTVA) vs Microsoft Corporation (MSFT): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-11-01, CTVA is undervalued at $12, with a DCF intrinsic value of $39 and a margin of safety of 70%. MSFT is undervalued at $522, with an intrinsic value of $802 and a margin of safety of 35%. Of the two, CTVA has the wider margin of safety.

CTVA
Corteva, Inc.
$11.64
VS
MSFT
Microsoft Corporation
$521.91

Rewards

CTVA
  • ★Free cash flow has grown at a 119.3% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • ★PEG ratio of 0.62 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.
MSFT
  • ★Microsoft Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • ★Gross margin of 67.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • ★Microsoft Corporation scores 84/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.

Risks

CTVA
  • ⚠Return on equity has remained below 5% over 4 years — shareholder capital is generating minimal returns.
  • ⚠Net debt/EBITDA of 4.2x indicates heavy leverage — it would take over 4 years of EBITDA to pay off net debt.
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.97 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
MSFT
  • ⚠FCF yield of 1.7% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • ⚠5 insider sales totaling $75.4M with no purchases in the past 3 months — insiders are reducing their exposure.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
CTVA
MSFT
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$66.99B
N/A
FCF Yield
1.73%
7.19
Trailing P/E
27.24
10.36
Forward P/E
21.62
Quality & Moat
3.82%
ROIC
22.53%
13.12%
ROE
34.22%
33.21%
Gross Margin
67.66%
0.62
PEG Ratio
1.69
Balance Sheet Safety
0.34
Net Debt / Equity
0.15
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
4.23
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.34
6.19%
Dividend Yield
0.75%
CTVA: 4Ties: 1MSFT: 5
CTVAMSFT

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
CTVA

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.

MSFT

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 →
CTVA
$0.34
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Value Destroyer
Σ Retained
$1.36B
Δ Market Cap
+$468.2M
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
MSFT
$4.30
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$251.42B
Δ Market Cap
+$1.08T
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 →
CTVA
72.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 72.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $11.64
Fair Value: $41.51
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MSFT
34.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 34.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $521.91
Fair Value: $801.72
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
CTVA

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

MSFT

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $522?

+13.0%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +22.5%

The market implies +13.0% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +22.5%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
CTVA
52/100
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.
MSFT
84/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. 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 →
CTVA
-2.69
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.
MSFT
-2.58
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 →
CTVA
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 92.8%Retail & Other 7.1%
No. of Institutional Holders1,924
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.
MSFT
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 75.8%Retail & Other 24.1%
No. of Institutional Holders8,181
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 →
CTVA
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
MSFT
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $1.99M
STANTON JOHN W.
Director
$1.99M
@ $397.35 · 2026-02-18
SMITH BRADFORD LEE
President
$1.45M
@ $377.47 · 2025-04-23
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 →
CTVA
0
Sells (3M)
1
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $636,200
TITUS BRIAN
Officer
$636,200
@ $76.55 · 2026-02-20
KING ROBERT D
Officer
$2.77M
@ $74.20 · 2025-08-29
FUERER CORNEL B
Officer
$3.76M
@ $68.06 · 2025-05-13
TITUS BRIAN
Officer
$1.69M
@ $63.74 · 2025-02-20
MAGRO CHARLES V.
Chief Executive Officer
$2.99M
@ $63.82 · 2025-02-19
FUERER CORNEL B
General Counsel
$2.39M
@ $63.40 · 2024-11-26
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
MSFT
5
Sells (3M)
13
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $118.56M
HOOD AMY E
Chief Financial Officer
$3.98M
@ $545.42 · 2026-10-13
HOOD AMY E
Chief Financial Officer
$20.76M
@ $498.27 · 2026-09-14
NADELLA SATYA
Chief Executive Officer
$43.39M
@ $501.46 · 2026-09-01
ALTHOFF JUDSON
Officer
$4.88M
@ $487.89 · 2026-08-05
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$2.39M
@ $496.52 · 2026-08-04
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$1.81M
@ $402.84 · 2026-06-10
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$1.03M
@ $412.45 · 2026-06-08
ALTHOFF JUDSON
Officer
$7.15M
@ $460.99 · 2026-06-01
COLEMAN AMY
Officer
$519,242
@ $411.44 · 2026-05-14
HOGAN KATHLEEN T
Officer
$5.05M
@ $409.55 · 2026-03-06
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$1.36M
@ $478.72 · 2025-12-04
ALTHOFF JUDSON
Officer
$6.27M
@ $491.52 · 2025-12-02
SMITH BRADFORD LEE
President
$19.97M
@ $518.64 · 2025-11-03
NADELLA SATYA
Chief Executive Officer
$75.32M
@ $504.78 · 2025-09-03
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$2.56M
@ $527.32 · 2025-08-12
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$1.39M
@ $463.00 · 2025-06-03
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$460,008
@ $460.01 · 2025-05-30
HOGAN KATHLEEN T
Officer
$9.76M
@ $453.77 · 2025-05-21
ALTHOFF JUDSON
Officer
$7.33M
@ $458.18 · 2025-05-19
COLEMAN AMY
Officer
$5.99M
@ $452.04 · 2025-05-15
SMITH BRADFORD LEE
President
$1.68M
@ $438.44 · 2025-05-05
SMITH BRADFORD LEE
President
$35.30M
@ $435.84 · 2025-05-05
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$1.12M
@ $447.41 · 2024-12-09
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$874,634
@ $437.32 · 2024-12-04
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$1.50M
@ $428.76 · 2024-12-02
ALTHOFF JUDSON
Officer
$10.43M
@ $417.00 · 2024-11-22
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$414,720
@ $414.72 · 2024-11-22
YOUNG CHRISTOPHER DAVID
Officer
$3.05M
@ $423.66 · 2024-11-12
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 →
CTVA
FearGreed
😨Fear(37/100)

"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.
MSFT
FearGreed
😐Neutral(60/100)

"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 →
CTVA
⚪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 (37)
MSFT
⚪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 (60)
View CTVA Full AnalysisView MSFT Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: CTVA vs MSFT

Is Corteva, Inc. or Microsoft Corporation more undervalued in 2026?▼

Based on our discounted cash flow model, CTVA trades at a 70.3% margin of safety (intrinsic value $39 vs. price $12), compared to MSFT's 34.9% margin of safety (intrinsic $802 vs. $522).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Corteva, Inc. or Microsoft Corporation?▼

MSFT scores 84/100 (Wide moat), while CTVA scores 52/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Corteva, Inc. in financial distress?▼

CTVA's Altman Z-Score of 1.0 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. MSFT scores 9.1 (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, Corteva, Inc. or Microsoft Corporation?▼

MSFT earns 22.5% ROIC versus CTVA's 3.8%. 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, Corteva, Inc.'s or Microsoft Corporation's?▼

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