Compare StocksDIS vs PEP

The Walt Disney Company (DIS) vs PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, DIS is undervalued at $104, with a DCF intrinsic value of $148 and a margin of safety of 30%. PEP is overvalued at $142, with an intrinsic value of $82 and a margin of safety of -74%. Of the two, DIS has the wider margin of safety.

DIS
The Walt Disney Company
$103.89
VS
PEP
PepsiCo, Inc.
$142.02

Rewards

DIS
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 111.4% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $6.06 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
  • Management has timed buybacks well — 2 out of 2 years showed value-accretive repurchases.
PEP
  • PepsiCo, Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • PepsiCo, Inc. scores 88/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 11.0% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.

Risks

DIS
  • FCF yield of 5.6% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • PEG ratio of 2.35 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
PEP
  • High leverage (1.95x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
DIS
PEP
Valuation
$10.08B
Free Cash Flow
$8.75B
5.59%
FCF Yield
4.51%
16.62
Trailing P/E
22.30
13.86
Forward P/E
15.59
Quality & Moat
7.33%
ROIC
17.22%
11.01%
ROE
43.88%
37.16%
Gross Margin
54.38%
2.35
PEG Ratio
1.57
Balance Sheet Safety
0.36
Net Debt / Equity
1.95
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.11
Net Debt / EBITDA
2.24
1.48%
Dividend Yield
4.02%
DIS: 6Ties: 1PEP: 5
DISPEP

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
DIS

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.

PEP

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 →
DIS
$2.96
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$16.56B
Δ Market Cap
+$49.03B
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
PEP
$-9.83
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$5.34B
Δ Market Cap
$-52.53B
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 →
DIS
30.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 30.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $103.89
Fair Value: $148.48
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
PEP
73.7% Overvalued
Price is 73.7% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $142.02
Fair Value: $81.78
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
DIS

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $104?

+6.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +9.0%

The market implies +6.2% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +9.0%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

PEP

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $142?

+12.6%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +11.8%

The market implies +12.6% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +11.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
DIS
51/100
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.
PEP
88/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. Revenue Predictability 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 →
DIS
-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.
PEP
-2.57
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 →
DIS
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 78.3%Retail & Other 21.6%
No. of Institutional Holders3,914
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.
PEP
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 80.9%Retail & Other 18.9%
No. of Institutional Holders4,456
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 →
DIS
0
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $2.11M
CHANG AMY L
Director
$98,791
@ $107.85 · 2026-02-12
GORMAN JAMES P
Director
$2.01M
@ $111.89 · 2025-12-12
MCDONALD CALVIN
Director
$999,994
@ $85.06 · 2024-08-08
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
PEP
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 →
DIS
0
Sells (3M)
3
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $792,757
COLEMAN SONIA L
Officer
$281,922
@ $114.00 · 2026-01-22
COLEMAN SONIA L
Officer
$277,134
@ $114.00 · 2025-12-24
COLEMAN SONIA L
Officer
$233,701
@ $118.57 · 2025-08-25
WOODFORD BRENT A
Officer
$110,845
@ $110.84 · 2025-05-13
COLEMAN SONIA L
Officer
$74,936
@ $108.76 · 2025-01-22
COLEMAN SONIA L
Officer
$342,766
@ $111.36 · 2024-12-17
WOODFORD BRENT A
Officer
$917,920
@ $114.74 · 2024-12-11
IGER ROBERT A
Chief Executive Officer
$42.67M
@ $114.57 · 2024-11-22
WOODFORD BRENT A
Officer
$568,101
@ $113.62 · 2024-11-20
COLEMAN SONIA L
Officer
$279,772
@ $99.99 · 2024-11-11
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
PEP
0
Sells (3M)
1
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $4.68M
LAGUARTA RAMON L
Chief Executive Officer
$4.68M
@ $167.39 · 2026-03-02
GALLAGHER MARIE T
Officer
$3.99M
@ $159.55 · 2025-03-04
KRISHNAN RAMKUMAR
Chief Executive Officer
$1.50M
@ $150.97 · 2025-03-03
WILLIAMS STEVEN C
Officer
$2.71M
@ $150.89 · 2025-03-03
FLAVELL DAVID JAMES
General Counsel
$1.04M
@ $150.90 · 2025-03-03
LAGUARTA RAMON L
Chief Executive Officer
$7.74M
@ $154.90 · 2025-03-03
SANTILLI PAULA ALEJANDRA
Officer
$1.18M
@ $151.89 · 2025-02-27
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 →
DIS
FearGreed
😐Neutral(53/100)

"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.
PEP
FearGreed
😐Neutral(48/100)

"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 →
DIS
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 (53)
PEP
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 (48)
View DIS Full AnalysisView PEP Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: DIS vs PEP

Is The Walt Disney Company or PepsiCo, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, DIS trades at a 30.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $148 vs. price $104), compared to PEP's -73.7% margin of safety (intrinsic $82 vs. $142).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, The Walt Disney Company or PepsiCo, Inc.?

PEP scores 88/100 (Wide moat), while DIS scores 51/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is The Walt Disney Company in financial distress?

DIS's Altman Z-Score of 2.5 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. PEP scores 3.5 (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, The Walt Disney Company or PepsiCo, Inc.?

The Walt Disney Company (DIS) generates a 5.6% free cash flow yield, compared to PepsiCo, Inc.'s 4.5%. 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, The Walt Disney Company or PepsiCo, Inc.?

PEP earns 17.2% ROIC versus DIS's 7.3%. 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, The Walt Disney Company's or PepsiCo, Inc.'s?

DIS's dividend earns a safety score of 88/100 (Very Safe), compared to PEP's 34/100 (Unsafe). DIS has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.