Compare StocksEPAM vs MS

EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM) vs Morgan Stanley (MS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-09-17, EPAM is undervalued at $118, with a DCF intrinsic value of $211 and a margin of safety of 44%. MS is undervalued at $203, with an intrinsic value of $303 and a margin of safety of 33%. Of the two, EPAM has the wider margin of safety.

EPAM
EPAM Systems, Inc.
$118.29
VS
MS
Morgan Stanley
$202.55

Rewards

EPAM
  • EPAM Systems, Inc. has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
  • EPAM Systems, Inc. scores 78/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with reinvestment efficiency as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 17.0% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
MS
  • Gross margin of 87.6% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Morgan Stanley scores 80/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $3.56 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

Risks

EPAM
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has produced only $0.21 of earning power — shareholders may have been better served by dividends.
MS
  • Altman Z-Score of 0.29 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
  • Insiders have sold $5.4M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
EPAM
MS
Valuation
$650.16M
Free Cash Flow
N/A
10.65%
FCF Yield
N/A
16.05
Trailing P/E
16.35
8.41
Forward P/E
14.85
Quality & Moat
13.22%
ROIC
3.53%
11.18%
ROE
17.97%
29.45%
Gross Margin
87.64%
0.66
PEG Ratio
1.82
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.85
Net Debt / EBITDA
N/A
0.00%
Dividend Yield
2.27%
EPAM: 3Ties: 2MS: 4
EPAMMS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
EPAM

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.

MS

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 →
EPAM
$-6.22
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$1.25B
Δ Market Cap
$-7.78B
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
MS
$6.65
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$20.84B
Δ Market Cap
+$138.59B
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 →
EPAM
44.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 44.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $118.29
Fair Value: $211.35
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MS
33.2% Margin of Safety
Price is 33.2% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $202.55
Fair Value: $303.09
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
EPAM

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $118?

-0.6%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies -4.3%

The market implies -0.6% Owner Earnings growth, roughly in line with history — reasonably priced.

Standard FCF implies -4.3%, reflecting ongoing growth investment.

MS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
EPAM
78/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. Reinvestment Efficiency 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 5 years of fundamental data.
MS
80/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. Margin Stability 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 →
EPAM
-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.
MS
-2.09
Possible 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 →
EPAM
Insiders 3.3%Institutions 119.2%
No. of Institutional Holders657
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.
MS
Insiders 24.4%Institutions 63.2%Retail & Other 12.4%
No. of Institutional Holders3,488
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 →
EPAM
0
Buys (3M)
4
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $60,000
SHNAYDER BORIS
Officer
$15,000
@ $135.14 · 2025-10-31
SOLOMON LAWRENCE F
Officer
$15,000
@ $135.14 · 2025-10-31
ABRAHAMS GARY C
Officer
$15,000
@ $135.14 · 2025-10-31
DVORKIN VIKTAR
Officer
$15,000
@ $135.14 · 2025-10-31
YEZHKOV SERGEY
Officer
$7,499
@ $133.91 · 2025-04-30
YEZHKOV SERGEY
Officer
$7,499
@ $133.91 · 2025-04-30
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
MS
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $5,630
PETERSON DOUGLAS L
Director
$5,630
@ $156.39 · 2025-10-17
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 →
EPAM
0
Sells (3M)
5
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $4.41M
SHNAYDER BORIS
Officer
$1.03M
@ $207.00 · 2025-12-10
ABRAHAMS GARY C
Officer
$107,574
@ $179.29 · 2025-11-17
YEZHKOV SERGEY
Officer
$227,058
@ $150.27 · 2025-10-21
YEZHKOV SERGEY
Officer
$1.52M
@ $150.86 · 2025-10-02
YEZHKOV SERGEY
Officer
$1.52M
@ $150.86 · 2025-10-02
SHNAYDER BORIS
Officer
$1.93M
@ $183.97 · 2025-05-22
YEZHKOV SERGEY
Officer
$3.58M
@ $199.07 · 2025-03-05
FEJES BALAZS
Officer
$1.08M
@ $200.00 · 2025-03-04
PETERSON JASON D
Chief Financial Officer
$277,046
@ $257.00 · 2025-01-27
PETERSON JASON D
Chief Financial Officer
$119,248
@ $257.00 · 2024-12-11
DVORKIN VIKTAR
Officer
$1.73M
@ $256.53 · 2024-12-11
PETERSON JASON D
Chief Financial Officer
$237,000
@ $237.00 · 2024-11-07
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
MS
2
Sells (3M)
14
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $64.71M
SCHAPIRO MARY L
Director
$212,055
@ $212.06 · 2026-07-28
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$5.21M
@ $215.55 · 2026-07-17
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$2.12M
@ $190.75 · 2026-04-20
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$2.78M
@ $189.24 · 2026-04-17
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$9.74M
@ $188.59 · 2026-04-16
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$3.04M
@ $188.22 · 2026-04-16
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$6.02M
@ $182.61 · 2026-01-30
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$3.69M
@ $184.55 · 2026-01-20
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$5.57M
@ $183.62 · 2026-01-20
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$3.97M
@ $184.00 · 2026-01-20
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$1.44M
@ $183.45 · 2026-01-20
YESHAYA SHARON
Chief Financial Officer
$2.94M
@ $185.77 · 2026-01-20
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$1.55M
@ $182.08 · 2026-01-20
PICK EDWARD N.
Chief Executive Officer
$16.43M
@ $164.34 · 2025-10-31
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.53M
@ $140.62 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$4.09M
@ $141.13 · 2025-07-17
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.69M
@ $141.12 · 2025-07-17
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$2.81M
@ $140.30 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$3.70M
@ $127.37 · 2025-05-12
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.80M
@ $120.00 · 2025-05-02
HERZ ROBERT H
Director
$95,459
@ $119.32 · 2025-05-02
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.12M
@ $111.65 · 2025-04-15
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$1.15M
@ $138.06 · 2025-01-22
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.52M
@ $136.92 · 2025-01-21
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.20M
@ $136.43 · 2025-01-21
AKRAM RAJA
Chief Financial Officer
$2.38M
@ $136.01 · 2025-01-21
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$5.00M
@ $136.61 · 2025-01-21
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.78M
@ $136.20 · 2025-01-21
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 →
EPAM
FearGreed
😨Fear(31/100)

"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.
MS
FearGreed
😐Neutral(52/100)

"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 →
EPAM
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 (31)
MS
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 (52)
View EPAM Full AnalysisView MS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: EPAM vs MS

Is EPAM Systems, Inc. or Morgan Stanley more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, EPAM trades at a 44.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $211 vs. price $118), compared to MS's 33.2% margin of safety (intrinsic $303 vs. $203).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, EPAM Systems, Inc. or Morgan Stanley?

MS scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while EPAM scores 78/100 (Wide moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Morgan Stanley in financial distress?

MS's Altman Z-Score of 0.3 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. EPAM scores 7.9 (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, EPAM Systems, Inc. or Morgan Stanley?

EPAM earns 13.2% ROIC versus MS's 3.5%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.