Compare StocksETR vs GS

Entergy Corporation (ETR) vs The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, ETR is overvalued at $111, with a DCF intrinsic value of $61 and a margin of safety of -83%. 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.

ETR
Entergy Corporation
$111.11
VS
GS
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
$1096.56

Rewards

ETR
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $3.47 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
GS
  • 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

ETR
  • Entergy Corporation scores only 27/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
  • Trailing P/E of 28.3x is 35% above the historical average of 21.0x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • PEG ratio of 2.22 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
GS
  • 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 →
ETR
GS
Valuation
$-3.91B
Free Cash Flow
N/A
-7.69%
FCF Yield
N/A
28.34
Trailing P/E
20.03
21.95
Forward P/E
16.71
Quality & Moat
3.79%
ROIC
1.95%
10.75%
ROE
14.55%
46.98%
Gross Margin
82.27%
2.22
PEG Ratio
1.68
Balance Sheet Safety
1.73
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
5.55
Net Debt / EBITDA
N/A
2.24%
Dividend Yield
1.65%
ETR: 2Ties: 1GS: 6
ETRGS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
ETR

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.

GS

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 →
ETR
$8.33
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$2.17B
Δ Market Cap
+$18.05B
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
GS
$5.60
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$26.00B
Δ Market Cap
+$145.60B
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 →
ETR
83.0% Overvalued
Price is 83.0% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $111.11
Fair Value: $60.73
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
GS
56.3% Margin of Safety
Price is 56.3% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $1096.56
Fair Value: $2506.96
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
ETR

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

GS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
ETR
27/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.

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.
GS
65/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability 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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
ETR
-2.65
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.
GS
-2.00
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 →
ETR
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 97.9%Retail & Other 1.8%
No. of Institutional Holders1,696
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.
GS
Insiders 0.5%Institutions 74.6%Retail & Other 24.8%
No. of Institutional Holders3,780
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 →
ETR
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $96,690
ROPP RALPH LEWIS
Director
$96,690
@ $96.69 · 2025-11-12
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
GS
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
HESS JOHN B JR.
Director
$2.00M
@ $511.68 · 2025-04-15
JOHNSON KEVIN RONALD
Director
$1.49M
@ $619.02 · 2025-01-17
FLAHERTY MARK A
Director
$29,545
@ $360.30 · 2024-09-27
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 →
ETR
1
Sells (3M)
15
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $12.23M
FISACKERLY HALEY R
Officer
$1.17M
@ $110.00 · 2026-06-03
HUDSON JOHN O. III
Officer
$1.05M
@ $104.79 · 2026-02-23
DINELLI JOHN C
Officer
$558,419
@ $103.95 · 2026-02-20
CHAPMAN JASON
Chief Technology Officer
$1.79M
@ $104.02 · 2026-02-13
BROWN MARCUS V
Officer
$2.25M
@ $105.12 · 2026-02-13
LANDREAUX LAURA R
Officer
$234,150
@ $93.66 · 2025-11-21
MINOR ANASTASIA
Officer
$481,950
@ $96.39 · 2025-11-04
FISACKERLY HALEY R
Officer
$495,624
@ $96.50 · 2025-11-04
CHAPMAN JASON
Officer
$483,050
@ $96.61 · 2025-11-03
ELLIS BRIAN W
Director
$4,133
@ $96.12 · 2025-10-31
CHAPMAN JASON
Chief Technology Officer
$727,426
@ $96.45 · 2025-10-30
MINOR ANASTASIA
Officer
$13,195
@ $91.00 · 2025-08-13
FISACKERLY HALEY R
Officer
$403,902
@ $90.50 · 2025-07-31
COOK-NELSON KIMBERLY
Chief Operating Officer
$1.91M
@ $90.20 · 2025-07-30
COOK-NELSON KIMBERLY
Chief Operating Officer
$660,000
@ $88.00 · 2025-07-22
ELLIS BRIAN W
Director
$53,261
@ $82.32 · 2025-05-30
FONTAN KIMBERLY A.
Chief Financial Officer
$2.29M
@ $81.95 · 2025-05-29
RODRIGUEZ DEANNA D
Officer
$266,101
@ $82.64 · 2025-03-06
FISACKERLY HALEY R
Officer
$1.56M
@ $87.34 · 2025-03-04
NORGEOT PETER S JR
Chief Operating Officer
$1.68M
@ $86.78 · 2025-02-28
MINOR ANASTASIA
Officer
$1.06M
@ $85.36 · 2025-02-25
CHAPMAN JASON
Officer
$294,645
@ $85.01 · 2025-02-24
MAY PHILLIP R JR
Officer
$3.00M
@ $85.28 · 2025-02-21
VIAMONTES ELIECER
Officer
$1.81M
@ $85.62 · 2025-02-20
BROWN MARCUS V
General Counsel
$13.73M
@ $87.06 · 2025-02-19
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
GS
7
Sells (3M)
17
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $92.56M
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$6.68M
@ $973.55 · 2026-05-14
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$13.42M
@ $939.07 · 2026-05-06
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$9.57M
@ $929.17 · 2026-05-01
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$634,927
@ $929.61 · 2026-05-01
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.23M
@ $930.70 · 2026-05-01
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$1.04M
@ $936.18 · 2026-04-23
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$1.02M
@ $919.19 · 2026-04-17
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$10.94M
@ $941.57 · 2026-02-09
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$255,387
@ $938.92 · 2026-01-29
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$2.64M
@ $927.17 · 2026-01-27
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$4.49M
@ $923.75 · 2026-01-23
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$8.89M
@ $927.51 · 2026-01-23
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$1.62M
@ $920.62 · 2026-01-23
WALDRON JOHN E.
President
$13.69M
@ $750.30 · 2025-08-28
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$5.41M
@ $724.40 · 2025-07-25
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$4.71M
@ $712.31 · 2025-07-23
ROGERS JOHN F W
Officer
$4.31M
@ $717.39 · 2025-07-23
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.04M
@ $607.17 · 2025-05-14
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$1.50M
@ $622.15 · 2025-02-26
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$3.31M
@ $636.25 · 2025-01-28
HALIO CAREY
Officer and Treasurer
$2.32M
@ $636.74 · 2025-01-24
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$1.28M
@ $627.01 · 2025-01-21
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$4.76M
@ $634.69 · 2025-01-21
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$965,120
@ $624.67 · 2025-01-21
VINIAR DAVID A
Director
$3.06M
@ $612.08 · 2024-11-29
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$4.00M
@ $610.91 · 2024-11-29
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$1.77M
@ $594.51 · 2024-11-06
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$7.67M
@ $593.03 · 2024-11-06
ROGERS JOHN F W
Officer
$3.83M
@ $596.36 · 2024-11-06
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.00M
@ $500.29 · 2024-08-15
VINIAR DAVID A
Director
$2.51M
@ $502.43 · 2024-07-16
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 →
ETR
FearGreed
😏Greed(61/100)

"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"

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.
GS
FearGreed
😏Greed(66/100)

"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"

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 →
ETR
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: Greed (61)
GS
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: Greed (66)
View ETR Full AnalysisView GS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: ETR vs GS

Is Entergy 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 ETR's -83.0% margin of safety (intrinsic $61 vs. $111).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Entergy Corporation or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.?

GS scores 65/100 (Narrow moat), while ETR scores 27/100 (None 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. ETR scores 1.0 (Distress 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, Entergy Corporation or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.?

ETR earns 3.8% 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.

Which dividend is safer, Entergy Corporation's or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.'s?

GS's dividend earns a safety score of 79/100 (Safe), compared to ETR's 69/100 (Safe). GS has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

ETR vs GS: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io