Compare StocksEPAM vs MSFT

EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM) vs Microsoft Corporation (MSFT): 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%. MSFT is undervalued at $496, with an intrinsic value of $752 and a margin of safety of 34%. Of the two, EPAM has the wider margin of safety.

EPAM
EPAM Systems, Inc.
$118.25
VS
MSFT
Microsoft Corporation
$495.85

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.
MSFT
  • Microsoft Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 67.9% 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

EPAM
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has produced only $0.21 of earning power — shareholders may have been better served by dividends.
MSFT
  • FCF yield of 1.8% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • Insiders have sold $71.4M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
EPAM
MSFT
Valuation
$650.16M
Free Cash Flow
$66.99B
10.66%
FCF Yield
1.82%
16.04
Trailing P/E
27.64
8.41
Forward P/E
21.02
Quality & Moat
13.22%
ROIC
20.70%
11.18%
ROE
34.04%
29.45%
Gross Margin
67.94%
0.66
PEG Ratio
1.59
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
0.12
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.85
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.27
0.00%
Dividend Yield
0.80%
EPAM: 6Ties: 1MSFT: 5
EPAMMSFT

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.

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 →
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
MSFT
$3.53
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$251.42B
Δ Market Cap
+$887.50B
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
44.1% Margin of Safety
Price is 44.1% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $118.25
Fair Value: $211.35
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MSFT
34.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 34.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $495.85
Fair Value: $751.73
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.

MSFT

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $496?

+12.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +21.7%

The market implies +12.2% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +21.7%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

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.
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 →
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.
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 →
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.
MSFT
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 75.8%Retail & Other 24.1%
No. of Institutional Holders8,175
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
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 →
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
MSFT
4
Sells (3M)
12
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $114.57M
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 →
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.
MSFT
FearGreed
😐Neutral(59/100)

"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)
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 (59)
View EPAM Full AnalysisView MSFT Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: EPAM vs MSFT

Is EPAM Systems, Inc. or Microsoft Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, EPAM trades at a 44.1% margin of safety (intrinsic value $211 vs. price $118), compared to MSFT's 34.0% margin of safety (intrinsic $752 vs. $496).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, EPAM Systems, Inc. or Microsoft Corporation?

MSFT scores 84/100 (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.

Which company has better free cash flow, EPAM Systems, Inc. or Microsoft Corporation?

EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM) generates a 10.7% free cash flow yield, compared to Microsoft Corporation's 1.8%. 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, EPAM Systems, Inc. or Microsoft Corporation?

MSFT earns 20.7% ROIC versus EPAM's 13.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.