Compare StocksFANG vs JNJ

Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) vs Johnson & Johnson (JNJ): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, FANG is overvalued at $184, with a DCF intrinsic value of $128 and a margin of safety of -44%. JNJ is fairly valued at $228, with an intrinsic value of $281 and a margin of safety of 19%. Of the two, JNJ has the wider margin of safety.

FANG
Diamondback Energy, Inc.
$183.50
VS
JNJ
Johnson & Johnson
$228.39

Rewards

FANG
  • Gross margin of 72.2% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
JNJ
  • Johnson & Johnson has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 68.0% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Johnson & Johnson scores 90/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.

Risks

FANG
  • ROIC has declined by 16.4 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • Diamondback Energy, Inc. scores only 14/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
  • Share count has increased by 58% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.
JNJ
  • Trailing P/E of 26.5x is 33% above the historical average of 20.0x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • PEG ratio of 3.06 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • Insiders have sold $2.4M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
FANG
JNJ
Valuation
$1.40B
Free Cash Flow
$19.31B
2.71%
FCF Yield
3.51%
187.24
Trailing P/E
26.46
10.42
Forward P/E
17.96
Quality & Moat
1.17%
ROIC
15.32%
0.47%
ROE
26.42%
72.25%
Gross Margin
68.04%
56.78
PEG Ratio
3.06
Balance Sheet Safety
0.32
Net Debt / Equity
0.41
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
1.35
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.96
2.34%
Dividend Yield
2.22%
FANG: 4Ties: 1JNJ: 7
FANGJNJ

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
FANG

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.

JNJ

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 →
FANG
$4.58
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$3.97B
Δ Market Cap
+$18.18B
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
JNJ
$0.91
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Mediocre Allocator
Σ Retained
$40.05B
Δ Market Cap
+$36.63B
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 →
FANG
339.3% Overvalued
Price is 339.3% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $183.50
Fair Value: $41.77
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
JNJ
18.6% Margin of Safety
Price is 18.6% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $228.39
Fair Value: $280.51
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
FANG

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $184?

+16.9%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +19.3%

The market implies +16.9% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +19.3%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

JNJ

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $228?

+7.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +13.3%

The market implies +7.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +13.3%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
FANG
14/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable competitive advantage detected. The business shows limited evidence of pricing power, consistent returns, or capital efficiency.

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.
JNJ
90/100
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 5 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
FANG
-2.99
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.
JNJ
-2.31
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 →
FANG
Insiders 27.0%Institutions 70.3%Retail & Other 2.7%
No. of Institutional Holders1,591
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.
JNJ
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 76.9%Retail & Other 23.1%
No. of Institutional Holders5,728
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 →
FANG
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
TSURU FRANK D
Director
$313,020
@ $156.51 · 2025-02-28
WEST STEVEN E
Director
$975,960
@ $162.66 · 2024-12-16
REEVES ROBERT K
Director
$509,760
@ $180.00 · 2024-11-08
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
JNJ
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $257,688
MORIKIS JOHN G
Director
$257,688
@ $206.15 · 2025-11-26
WEINBERGER MARK A
Director
$147,220
@ $147.22 · 2024-12-12
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 →
FANG
12
Sells (3M)
32
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $5.04B
PLAUMANN MARK LAWRENCE
Director
$98,250
@ $196.50 · 2026-06-09
SGF FANG HOLDINGS,LP
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$2.04B
@ $204.25 · 2026-06-04
DICK TERESA L
Officer
$1.02M
@ $205.00 · 2026-06-04
ZMIGROSKY MATTHEW PAUL
Officer
$1.05M
@ $210.00 · 2026-06-03
VANT HOF MATTHEW KAES
Chief Executive Officer
$3.13M
@ $208.33 · 2026-06-03
DICK TERESA L
Officer
$1.41M
@ $200.90 · 2026-06-02
ZMIGROSKY MATTHEW PAUL
Officer
$1.00M
@ $200.54 · 2026-06-01
DICK TERESA L
Officer
$1.03M
@ $207.00 · 2026-05-19
THOMPSON JERE W III
Chief Financial Officer
$203,160
@ $203.16 · 2026-05-15
BARKMANN ALBERT
Officer
$612,112
@ $204.04 · 2026-05-15
DICK TERESA L
Officer
$1.00M
@ $200.00 · 2026-05-14
ZMIGROSKY MATTHEW PAUL
Officer
$1.00M
@ $200.10 · 2026-05-13
WESSON DANIEL N.
Chief Operating Officer
$959,776
@ $191.96 · 2026-03-20
DICK TERESA L
Officer
$965,000
@ $193.00 · 2026-03-20
ZMIGROSKY MATTHEW PAUL
Officer
$781,293
@ $190.51 · 2026-03-18
DICK TERESA L
Officer
$950,000
@ $190.00 · 2026-03-18
WEST STEVEN E
Director
$1.13M
@ $188.35 · 2026-03-18
THOMPSON JERE W III
Chief Financial Officer
$136,851
@ $182.47 · 2026-03-16
ZMIGROSKY MATTHEW PAUL
Officer
$3.76M
@ $180.00 · 2026-03-13
BARKMANN ALBERT
Officer
$731,600
@ $182.90 · 2026-03-13
SGF FANG HOLDINGS,LP
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$2.15B
@ $170.19 · 2026-03-12
DICK TERESA L
Officer
$1.01M
@ $183.07 · 2026-03-09
WESSON DANIEL N.
Chief Operating Officer
$3.62M
@ $181.11 · 2026-03-06
THOMPSON JERE W III
Chief Financial Officer
$136,260
@ $181.68 · 2026-03-06
VANT HOF MATTHEW KAES
Chief Executive Officer
$1.81M
@ $180.84 · 2026-03-06
SGF FANG HOLDINGS,LP
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$176.71M
@ $176.71 · 2026-03-04
SGF FANG HOLDINGS,LP
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$331.87M
@ $165.94 · 2026-02-04
SGF FANG HOLDINGS,LP
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$305.18M
@ $152.59 · 2025-11-28
WESSON DANIEL N.
Chief Operating Officer
$596,948
@ $149.24 · 2025-11-26
ZMIGROSKY MATTHEW PAUL
Officer
$518,630
@ $148.18 · 2025-11-14
THOMPSON JERE W III
Chief Financial Officer
$147,730
@ $147.73 · 2025-11-11
VANT HOF MATTHEW KAES
Chief Executive Officer
$1.41M
@ $140.61 · 2025-11-06
THOMPSON JERE W III
Chief Financial Officer
$212,275
@ $141.52 · 2025-06-09
WESSON DANIEL N.
Officer
$710,306
@ $142.06 · 2025-06-03
VANT HOF MATTHEW KAES
President
$1.43M
@ $142.69 · 2025-05-12
VANT HOF MATTHEW KAES
President
$653,928
@ $163.48 · 2024-12-13
DICK TERESA L
Officer
$1.00M
@ $200.00 · 2024-08-09
VANT HOF MATTHEW KAES
President
$9.91M
@ $198.15 · 2024-08-08
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
JNJ
1
Sells (3M)
13
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $103.65M
WENGEL KATHRYN E
Chief Technology Officer
$2.41M
@ $241.15 · 2026-06-11
DECKER ROBERT J
Officer
$1.01M
@ $247.87 · 2026-02-27
SCHMID TIMOTHY
Officer
$324,763
@ $245.66 · 2026-02-20
SCHMID TIMOTHY
Officer
$5.53M
@ $244.33 · 2026-02-18
SWANSON JAMES D
Chief Technology Officer
$15.11M
@ $243.39 · 2026-02-17
BROADHURST VANESSA
Officer
$1.51M
@ $243.39 · 2026-02-17
WOLK JOSEPH J
Chief Financial Officer
$21.77M
@ $242.80 · 2026-02-17
REED JOHN C
Officer
$13.11M
@ $243.00 · 2026-02-17
REED JOHN C
Officer
$4.19M
@ $192.71 · 2025-10-17
TAUBERT JENNIFER L
Officer
$10.04M
@ $177.81 · 2025-09-04
DUATO JOAQUIN BOIX
Chief Executive Officer
$22.55M
@ $179.21 · 2025-08-22
WOLK JOSEPH J
Chief Financial Officer
$2.98M
@ $176.91 · 2025-08-15
REED JOHN C
Officer
$3.13M
@ $163.55 · 2025-07-17
DECKER ROBERT J
Officer
$1.16M
@ $165.88 · 2025-02-25
SCHMID TIMOTHY
Officer
$62,928
@ $156.15 · 2025-02-18
WOLK JOSEPH J
Chief Financial Officer
$2.00M
@ $153.89 · 2025-02-07
DECKER ROBERT J
Officer
$930,113
@ $165.06 · 2024-08-30
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 →
FANG
FearGreed
😐Neutral(49/100)

"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.
JNJ
FearGreed
😏Greed(62/100)

"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 →
FANG
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 (49)
JNJ
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 (62)
View FANG Full AnalysisView JNJ Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: FANG vs JNJ

Is Diamondback Energy, Inc. or Johnson & Johnson more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, JNJ trades at a 18.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $281 vs. price $228), compared to FANG's -43.9% margin of safety (intrinsic $128 vs. $184).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Diamondback Energy, Inc. or Johnson & Johnson?

JNJ scores 90/100 (Wide moat), while FANG scores 14/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Diamondback Energy, Inc. in financial distress?

FANG's Altman Z-Score of 1.4 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. JNJ 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, Diamondback Energy, Inc. or Johnson & Johnson?

Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) generates a 3.5% free cash flow yield, compared to Diamondback Energy, Inc.'s 2.7%. 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, Diamondback Energy, Inc. or Johnson & Johnson?

JNJ earns 15.3% ROIC versus FANG's 1.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Which dividend is safer, Diamondback Energy, Inc.'s or Johnson & Johnson's?

JNJ's dividend earns a safety score of 79/100 (Safe), compared to FANG's 60/100 (Safe). JNJ has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.