Deckers Outdoor Corporation (DECK) vs The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?
As of 2026-06-19, DECK is undervalued at $109, with a DCF intrinsic value of $202 and a margin of safety of 46%. GS is undervalued at $1097, with an intrinsic value of $2507 and a margin of safety of 56%. Of the two, GS has the wider margin of safety.
Rewards
- ★Deckers Outdoor Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
- ★Deckers Outdoor Corporation scores 93/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
- ★Free cash flow has grown at a 34.0% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
- ★Gross margin of 82.3% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
- ★Share count has been reduced by 11% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
- ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.58 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
Risks
- ⚠FCF yield of 5.7% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
- ⚠Trailing P/E of 20.0x is 36% above the historical average of 14.7x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
- ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.25 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
- ⚠7 insider sales totaling $35.6M 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 $109?
The market implies +2.1% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.
Standard FCF implies a more demanding +4.5%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.
Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.
Economic Moat Score
Learn more →Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency is the standout factor.
Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability would strengthen the moat.
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 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: DECK vs GS
Is Deckers Outdoor Corporation or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?▼
Based on our discounted cash flow model, GS trades at a 56.3% margin of safety (intrinsic value $2507 vs. price $1097), compared to DECK's 46.1% margin of safety (intrinsic $202 vs. $109).
Which stock has a wider economic moat, Deckers Outdoor Corporation or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.?▼
DECK scores 93/100 (Wide moat), while GS scores 65/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.
Is The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. in financial distress?▼
GS's Altman Z-Score of 0.3 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. DECK scores 11.8 (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, Deckers Outdoor Corporation or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.?▼
DECK earns 21.1% ROIC versus GS's 1.9%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.