Compare StocksGIS vs INTU

General Mills, Inc. (GIS) vs Intuit Inc. (INTU): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, GIS is undervalued at $33, with a DCF intrinsic value of $67 and a margin of safety of 50%. INTU is undervalued at $267, with an intrinsic value of $536 and a margin of safety of 50%. Of the two, INTU has the wider margin of safety.

GIS
General Mills, Inc.
$33.42
VS
INTU
Intuit Inc.
$267.00

Rewards

GIS
  • General Mills, Inc. scores 86/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Return on equity has consistently exceeded 20% over 4 years, indicating efficient use of shareholder capital.
  • FCF yield of 12.7% is historically attractive — the business generates significant cash relative to its price.
INTU
  • Gross margin of 80.8% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Intuit Inc. scores 79/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 18.5% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.

Risks

GIS
  • PEG ratio of 11.74 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • Free cash flow has declined at a 5.8% CAGR over the past 4 years — a concerning trend.
INTU
  • FCF yield of 7.2% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
GIS
INTU
Valuation
$2.26B
Free Cash Flow
$5.23B
12.69%
FCF Yield
7.16%
8.17
Trailing P/E
16.30
10.63
Forward P/E
9.77
Quality & Moat
N/A
ROIC
28.21%
23.59%
ROE
22.50%
33.14%
Gross Margin
80.79%
11.74
PEG Ratio
0.73
Balance Sheet Safety
N/A
Net Debt / Equity
0.01
No debt
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.12
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.02
7.09%
Dividend Yield
1.71%
GIS: 4Ties: 1INTU: 4
GISINTU

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
GIS

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.

INTU

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 →
GIS
$-7.36
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$3.40B
Δ Market Cap
$-25.00B
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
INTU
$12.31
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$6.10B
Δ Market Cap
+$75.17B
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 →
GIS
49.8% Margin of Safety
Price is 49.8% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $33.42
Fair Value: $66.59
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
INTU
50.2% Margin of Safety
Price is 50.2% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $267.00
Fair Value: $535.61
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
GIS

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $33?

-5.8%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies -5.6%

The market implies -5.8% Owner Earnings growth, roughly in line with history — reasonably priced.

Standard FCF implies -5.6%, reflecting ongoing growth investment.

INTU

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $267?

+4.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +2.8%

The market implies +4.7% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +2.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
GIS
86/100
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.
INTU
79/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. ROIC Consistency 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 →
GIS
-2.55
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.
INTU
-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.

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 →
GIS
Insiders 0.3%Institutions 90.6%Retail & Other 9.0%
No. of Institutional Holders1,790
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.
INTU
Insiders 2.4%Institutions 92.3%Retail & Other 5.4%
No. of Institutional Holders2,820
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 →
GIS
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
INTU
1
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $541,665
PRABHU VASANT M.
Director
$541,665
@ $309.52 · 2026-05-26
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 →
GIS
1
Sells (3M)
2
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $348,059
FERNANDEZ RICARDO
Officer
$275,828
@ $34.50 · 2026-05-12
GALLAGHER PAUL JOSEPH
Officer
$72,231
@ $48.15 · 2025-12-19
SHARMA PANKAJ MN
Officer
$197,159
@ $54.12 · 2025-05-15
HARMENING JEFFREY L
Chief Executive Officer
$739,635
@ $65.00 · 2025-03-07
GALLAGHER PAUL JOSEPH
Officer
$67,144
@ $64.50 · 2024-12-20
SASTRE MARIA AMALIA
Director
$63,660
@ $63.66 · 2024-11-15
HARMENING JEFFREY L
Chief Executive Officer
$3.19M
@ $68.61 · 2024-10-23
PALLOT MARK A
Officer
$576,149
@ $71.28 · 2024-10-15
NUDI JONATHON J
Officer
$717,650
@ $74.39 · 2024-09-27
SHARMA PANKAJ MN
Officer
$173,516
@ $74.63 · 2024-09-20
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
INTU
1
Sells (3M)
16
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $11.47M
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$289,448
@ $288.29 · 2026-06-11
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$457,046
@ $457.50 · 2026-03-12
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$840,097
@ $629.76 · 2026-01-05
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$741,172
@ $675.02 · 2025-12-19
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$219,763
@ $659.95 · 2025-12-11
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$435,354
@ $653.68 · 2025-12-10
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$792,160
@ $677.06 · 2025-10-03
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$665,951
@ $666.62 · 2025-09-11
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$27,930
@ $665.00 · 2025-08-25
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$255,887
@ $768.43 · 2025-07-10
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$521,891
@ $783.62 · 2025-07-09
BALAZS ALEX G
Chief Technology Officer
$689,400
@ $782.52 · 2025-07-08
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$2.03M
@ $782.22 · 2025-07-03
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$1.25M
@ $773.90 · 2025-07-02
NOTARAINNI MARK PHILLIP
Officer
$887,583
@ $774.51 · 2025-07-02
HOTZ LAUREN DALE
Officer
$1.36M
@ $784.24 · 2025-06-27
BALAZS ALEX G
Chief Technology Officer
$1.12M
@ $771.24 · 2025-06-05
TESSEL MARIANNA
Officer
$26.12M
@ $760.84 · 2025-06-03
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$19.29M
@ $752.25 · 2025-05-29
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$30.46M
@ $738.61 · 2025-05-28
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$11.66M
@ $726.15 · 2025-05-27
NOTARAINNI MARK PHILLIP
Officer
$340,143
@ $725.25 · 2025-05-27
MCLEAN KERRY JEAN
General Counsel
$12.18M
@ $729.16 · 2025-05-27
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$5.00M
@ $612.45 · 2025-03-24
TESSEL MARIANNA
Officer
$4.43M
@ $600.13 · 2025-03-21
BURTON EVE B
Director
$1.02M
@ $600.00 · 2025-03-20
HOTZ LAUREN DALE
Officer
$667,838
@ $619.52 · 2025-01-10
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$814,350
@ $626.42 · 2025-01-08
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$2.94M
@ $613.70 · 2025-01-07
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$68,506
@ $628.50 · 2025-01-03
NOTARAINNI MARK PHILLIP
Officer
$228,121
@ $630.17 · 2025-01-03
BALAZS ALEX G
Chief Technology Officer
$15.86M
@ $665.98 · 2024-12-12
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$5.06M
@ $657.64 · 2024-12-10
MCLEAN KERRY JEAN
General Counsel
$11.16M
@ $650.78 · 2024-12-09
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 →
GIS
FearGreed
😨Fear(30/100)

"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.
INTU
FearGreed
😨Fear(25/100)

"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.

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 →
GIS
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 (30)
INTU
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 (25)
View GIS Full AnalysisView INTU Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: GIS vs INTU

Is General Mills, Inc. or Intuit Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, INTU trades at a 50.2% margin of safety (intrinsic value $536 vs. price $267), compared to GIS's 49.8% margin of safety (intrinsic $67 vs. $33).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, General Mills, Inc. or Intuit Inc.?

GIS scores 86/100 (Wide moat), while INTU scores 79/100 (Wide moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is General Mills, Inc. in financial distress?

GIS's Altman Z-Score of 2.4 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. INTU 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 company has better free cash flow, General Mills, Inc. or Intuit Inc.?

General Mills, Inc. (GIS) generates a 12.7% free cash flow yield, compared to Intuit Inc.'s 7.2%. A higher FCF yield means the business converts more of its market value into cash that can be returned to shareholders or reinvested.

Which dividend is safer, General Mills, Inc.'s or Intuit Inc.'s?

INTU's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to GIS's 84/100 (Very Safe). INTU has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.