Compare StocksES vs MSFT

Eversource Energy (ES) vs Microsoft Corporation (MSFT): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-08-03, ES is overvalued at $72, with a DCF intrinsic value of $5 and a margin of safety of -1340%. MSFT is undervalued at $465, with an intrinsic value of $724 and a margin of safety of 36%. Of the two, MSFT has the wider margin of safety.

ES
Eversource Energy
$71.59
VS
MSFT
Microsoft Corporation
$464.72

Rewards

ES
  • Trailing P/E of 15.3x is 24% below the historical average of 20.3x — potentially undervalued relative to its own history.
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

ES
  • PEG ratio of 2.66 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • High leverage (1.80x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
  • Net debt/EBITDA of 6.1x indicates heavy leverage — it would take over 4 years of EBITDA to pay off net debt.
MSFT
  • FCF yield of 1.9% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • Insiders have sold $10.5M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
ES
MSFT
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$66.99B
N/A
FCF Yield
1.94%
15.33
Trailing P/E
25.90
14.59
Forward P/E
19.96
Quality & Moat
5.28%
ROIC
20.70%
10.14%
ROE
34.04%
52.75%
Gross Margin
67.94%
2.66
PEG Ratio
1.52
Balance Sheet Safety
1.80
Net Debt / Equity
0.12
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
6.12
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.27
4.40%
Dividend Yield
0.78%
ES: 3Ties: 1MSFT: 6
ESMSFT

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
ES

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 →
ES
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-974.3M
Δ Market Cap
$-3.94B
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
$2.61
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$251.42B
Δ Market Cap
+$657.41B
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 →
ES
1340.5% Overvalued
Price is 1340.5% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $71.59
Fair Value: $4.97
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MSFT
35.8% Margin of Safety
Price is 35.8% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $464.72
Fair Value: $724.34
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
ES

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

MSFT

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $465?

+11.4%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +20.8%

The market implies +11.4% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +20.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

Economic Moat Score

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

Narrow moat with margin stability as the key competitive advantage. Improving reinvestment efficiency 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 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 →
ES
-2.62
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone
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 →
ES
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 87.2%Retail & Other 12.6%
No. of Institutional Holders1,478
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 24.2%
No. of Institutional Holders8,079
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 →
ES
1
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $299,603
MUDGE WARREN ROBERT
Trustee
$49,864
@ $66.49 · 2026-05-08
KEANE LORETTA D.
Trustee
$249,739
@ $66.07 · 2025-08-22
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 →
ES
1
Sells (3M)
9
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $2.65M
BUTLER GREGORY B
General Counsel
$489,160
@ $69.88 · 2026-06-04
CONNER PENELOPE M
Officer
$105,000
@ $75.00 · 2026-03-04
CLEVELAND COTTON MATHER
Trustee
$193,239
@ $74.87 · 2026-02-24
MOREIRA JOHN M.
Chief Financial Officer
$576,420
@ $73.90 · 2026-02-19
FORRY LINDA DORCENA
Trustee
$188,559
@ $73.06 · 2026-02-18
WILLIAMS FREDERICA M
Trustee
$189,239
@ $73.32 · 2026-02-17
BUTLER GREGORY B
General Counsel
$365,400
@ $73.08 · 2025-11-12
HUNT JAMES W III
Officer
$300,489
@ $72.78 · 2025-11-07
CONNER PENELOPE M
Officer
$238,212
@ $64.38 · 2025-08-29
CONNER PENELOPE M
Officer
$166,400
@ $64.00 · 2025-05-20
BUTLER GREGORY B
General Counsel
$752,148
@ $62.68 · 2025-02-28
CONNER PENELOPE M
Officer
$63,630
@ $63.63 · 2025-02-26
CLEVELAND COTTON MATHER
Trustee
$492,062
@ $63.50 · 2025-02-26
BUTH JAY S
Officer
$61,735
@ $62.99 · 2025-02-21
FORRY LINDA DORCENA
Trustee
$63,050
@ $63.05 · 2025-02-20
WILLIAMS FREDERICA M
Trustee
$192,508
@ $62.26 · 2025-02-19
FORRY LINDA DORCENA
Trustee
$127,110
@ $60.76 · 2025-02-18
CONNER PENELOPE M
Officer
$33,452
@ $66.90 · 2024-08-30
CONNER PENELOPE M
Officer
$53,382
@ $65.50 · 2024-08-13
CONNER PENELOPE M
Officer
$32,468
@ $64.94 · 2024-08-09
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
MSFT
4
Sells (3M)
10
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $121.03M
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
NUMOTO TAKESHI
Officer
$1.03M
@ $411.04 · 2024-09-10
HOGAN KATHLEEN T
Officer
$7.16M
@ $411.86 · 2024-09-10
SMITH BRADFORD LEE
President
$16.10M
@ $402.59 · 2024-09-09
HOOD AMY E
Chief Financial Officer
$15.60M
@ $410.55 · 2024-09-05
NADELLA SATYA
Chief Executive Officer
$32.02M
@ $408.63 · 2024-09-04
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 →
ES
FearGreed
😐Neutral(54/100)

"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.
MSFT
FearGreed
😐Neutral(57/100)

"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 →
ES
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 (54)
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 (57)
View ES Full AnalysisView MSFT Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: ES vs MSFT

Is Eversource Energy or Microsoft Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, MSFT trades at a 35.8% margin of safety (intrinsic value $724 vs. price $465), compared to ES's -1340.5% margin of safety (intrinsic $5 vs. $72).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Eversource Energy or Microsoft Corporation?

MSFT scores 84/100 (Wide moat), while ES scores 40/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Eversource Energy in financial distress?

ES's Altman Z-Score of 0.7 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. MSFT scores 8.3 (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, Eversource Energy or Microsoft Corporation?

MSFT earns 20.7% ROIC versus ES's 5.3%. 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, Eversource Energy's or Microsoft Corporation's?

MSFT's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to ES's 69/100 (Safe). MSFT has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.