Compare StocksFICO vs TSLA

Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) vs Tesla, Inc. (TSLA): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, FICO is undervalued at $1096, with a DCF intrinsic value of $1604 and a margin of safety of 32%. TSLA is overvalued at $400, with an intrinsic value of $131 and a margin of safety of -206%. Of the two, FICO has the wider margin of safety.

FICO
Fair Isaac Corporation
$1096.48
VS
TSLA
Tesla, Inc.
$400.49

Rewards

FICO
  • Fair Isaac Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 84.2% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Fair Isaac Corporation scores 100/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
TSLA
  • Altman Z-Score of 19.94 indicates very low bankruptcy risk — the company is firmly in the safe zone.
  • Net debt/EBITDA of -2.6x means the company holds more cash than debt — a net cash position.

Risks

FICO
  • FCF yield of 2.9% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • 10 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
TSLA
  • ROIC has declined by 21.5 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • Gross margin of 19.1% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • Share count has increased by 19% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
FICO
TSLA
Valuation
$730.54M
Free Cash Flow
$5.25B
2.87%
FCF Yield
0.35%
34.75
Trailing P/E
367.42
20.14
Forward P/E
160.20
Quality & Moat
28.36%
ROIC
3.23%
N/A
ROE
4.90%
84.17%
Gross Margin
19.06%
0.80
PEG Ratio
5.78
Balance Sheet Safety
N/A
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.96
Net Debt / EBITDA
-2.60
0.00%
Dividend Yield
0.00%
FICO: 6Ties: 1TSLA: 3
FICOTSLA

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
FICO

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.

TSLA

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 →
FICO
$15.76
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$1.59B
Δ Market Cap
+$25.12B
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
TSLA
$50.04
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$25.92B
Δ Market Cap
+$1.30T
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 →
FICO
31.6% Margin of Safety
Price is 31.6% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $1096.48
Fair Value: $1603.65
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
TSLA
626.9% Overvalued
Price is 626.9% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $400.49
Fair Value: $55.09
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
FICO

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $1096?

+18.5%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +17.0%

The market implies +18.5% Owner Earnings growth, roughly in line with history — reasonably priced.

Standard FCF implies +17.0%, reflecting ongoing growth investment.

TSLA

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $400?

+50.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +45.1%

The market implies +50.2% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +45.1%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

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

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency 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 4 years of fundamental data.
TSLA
31/100
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 4 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
FICO
-2.68
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.
TSLA
-2.86
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 →
FICO
Insiders 2.8%Institutions 95.4%Retail & Other 1.8%
No. of Institutional Holders1,272
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.
TSLA
Insiders 11.1%Institutions 44.9%Retail & Other 44.0%
No. of Institutional Holders5,237
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 →
FICO
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
TSLA
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $999.96M
MUSK ELON REEVE
Chief Executive Officer
$999.96M
@ $389.28 · 2025-09-12
GEBBIA JOSEPH
Director
$1.03M
@ $256.31 · 2025-04-24
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 →
FICO
0
Sells (3M)
10
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $42.58M
MANOLIS EVA
Director
$638,368
@ $1227.63 · 2026-02-25
WEBER STEVEN P.
Chief Financial Officer
$2.58M
@ $1810.00 · 2025-12-17
MANOLIS EVA
Director
$951,257
@ $1825.83 · 2025-12-12
MCMORRIS MARC F
Director
$434,287
@ $1809.53 · 2025-11-26
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$8.06M
@ $1631.34 · 2025-10-14
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$1.76M
@ $1650.17 · 2025-10-14
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$9.24M
@ $1537.50 · 2025-09-09
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$9.03M
@ $1501.84 · 2025-08-28
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$5.97M
@ $1565.99 · 2025-07-08
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$3.92M
@ $1780.48 · 2025-07-08
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$10.62M
@ $1767.82 · 2025-06-10
WEBER STEVEN P.
Chief Financial Officer
$1.74M
@ $1738.25 · 2025-06-09
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$11.64M
@ $2147.97 · 2025-05-13
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$1.28M
@ $2170.34 · 2025-05-13
MCMORRIS MARC F
Director
$1.66M
@ $2087.50 · 2025-05-09
BOWERS THOMAS A
Officer
$8.39M
@ $2057.05 · 2025-05-02
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$5.14M
@ $1683.35 · 2025-04-08
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$5.21M
@ $1761.13 · 2025-04-08
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$3.25M
@ $1694.38 · 2025-03-11
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$7.07M
@ $1727.69 · 2025-03-11
LANSING WILLIAM J
Chief Executive Officer
$10.84M
@ $1804.23 · 2025-02-11
WEBER STEVEN P.
Chief Financial Officer
$273,054
@ $1964.42 · 2025-01-08
MCMORRIS MARC F
Director
$1.12M
@ $2152.57 · 2024-12-17
WEHMANN JAMES M.
Officer
$6.59M
@ $2195.19 · 2024-12-12
SCADINA MARK R
General Counsel
$2,390
@ $2390.00 · 2024-12-09
SCADINA MARK R
General Counsel
$6.16M
@ $2389.99 · 2024-12-06
WEHMANN JAMES M.
Officer
$8.31M
@ $2373.85 · 2024-12-05
WEHMANN JAMES M.
Officer
$8.12M
@ $2320.41 · 2024-11-21
KELLY BRADEN R
Director
$9.10M
@ $2343.43 · 2024-11-11
BOWERS THOMAS A
Officer
$6.27M
@ $2338.21 · 2024-11-11
STANSBURY HENRY TAYLOE
Director
$582,299
@ $2338.55 · 2024-11-11
REY DAVID A
Director
$10.95M
@ $2340.28 · 2024-11-11
REES JOANNA
Director
$6.93M
@ $1750.00 · 2024-09-05
MCMORRIS MARC F
Director
$2.59M
@ $1749.33 · 2024-08-13
BOWERS THOMAS A
Officer
$5.15M
@ $1715.27 · 2024-08-12
WEBER STEVEN P.
Chief Financial Officer
$3.12M
@ $1735.00 · 2024-08-09
SCADINA MARK R
General Counsel
$6.00M
@ $1714.18 · 2024-08-08
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
TSLA
4
Sells (3M)
10
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $62.72M
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.05M
@ $402.27 · 2026-06-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.35M
@ $450.00 · 2026-05-13
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$9.99M
@ $378.11 · 2026-04-30
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$9.27M
@ $359.33 · 2026-03-30
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$899,077
@ $397.12 · 2026-03-06
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$10.69M
@ $415.56 · 2026-02-25
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$25.61M
@ $450.66 · 2025-12-09
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.17M
@ $443.93 · 2025-12-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$918,137
@ $352.45 · 2025-09-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.77M
@ $295.26 · 2025-07-08
ZHU XIAOTONG
Officer
$4.86M
@ $323.81 · 2025-06-12
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$732,573
@ $285.71 · 2025-06-09
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.40M
@ $342.30 · 2025-06-03
EHRENPREIS IRA MATTHEW
Director
$170.64M
@ $357.30 · 2025-05-27
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$32.73M
@ $357.39 · 2025-05-27
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.05M
@ $350.11 · 2025-05-16
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.20M
@ $300.00 · 2025-05-09
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$30.81M
@ $274.12 · 2025-05-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.14M
@ $284.40 · 2025-05-01
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$32.10M
@ $285.58 · 2025-04-29
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.00M
@ $250.00 · 2025-04-07
MURDOCH JAMES RUPERT
Director
$13.19M
@ $240.79 · 2025-03-10
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$718,111
@ $268.75 · 2025-03-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$33.67M
@ $299.61 · 2025-03-03
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.78M
@ $296.02 · 2025-03-03
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$27.59M
@ $367.87 · 2025-02-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$43.16M
@ $384.04 · 2025-02-03
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.68M
@ $383.11 · 2025-02-03
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$41.16M
@ $411.63 · 2025-01-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.89M
@ $413.56 · 2025-01-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$975,015
@ $374.29 · 2024-12-06
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$35.25M
@ $352.54 · 2024-12-04
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$39.79M
@ $354.06 · 2024-12-02
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.48M
@ $354.43 · 2024-12-02
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$35.34M
@ $314.44 · 2024-11-15
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$34.60M
@ $346.02 · 2024-11-11
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$3.80M
@ $316.91 · 2024-11-11
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$15.14M
@ $250.23 · 2024-11-01
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.01M
@ $251.76 · 2024-11-01
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.00M
@ $250.00 · 2024-10-24
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.00M
@ $250.00 · 2024-09-23
ZHU XIAOTONG
Officer
$65,867
@ $221.77 · 2024-09-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$14.60M
@ $219.96 · 2024-07-25
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 →
FICO
FearGreed
😨Fear(26/100)

"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.
TSLA
FearGreed
😐Neutral(45/100)

"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 →
FICO
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 (26)
TSLA
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 (45)
View FICO Full AnalysisView TSLA Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: FICO vs TSLA

Is Fair Isaac Corporation or Tesla, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, FICO trades at a 31.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $1604 vs. price $1096), compared to TSLA's -206.1% margin of safety (intrinsic $131 vs. $400).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Fair Isaac Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

FICO scores 100/100 (Wide moat), while TSLA scores 31/100 (None 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, Fair Isaac Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) generates a 2.9% free cash flow yield, compared to Tesla, Inc.'s 0.3%. 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, Fair Isaac Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

FICO earns 28.4% ROIC versus TSLA's 3.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.