Compare StocksGOOGL vs LUV

Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) vs Southwest Airlines Co. (LUV): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, GOOGL is overvalued at $368, with a DCF intrinsic value of $94 and a margin of safety of -290%. LUV is undervalued at $48, with an intrinsic value of $66 and a margin of safety of 27%. Of the two, LUV has the wider margin of safety.

GOOGL
Alphabet Inc.
$368.03
VS
LUV
Southwest Airlines Co.
$47.97

Rewards

GOOGL
  • Alphabet Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 60.4% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Alphabet Inc. scores 89/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
LUV
  • Share count has been reduced by 13% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
  • Trailing P/E of 32.0x is 22% below the historical average of 41.2x — potentially undervalued relative to its own history.
  • PEG ratio of 0.32 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.

Risks

GOOGL
  • FCF yield of 1.6% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
LUV
  • Gross margin of 23.0% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • Buybacks have been poorly timed — 2 out of 2 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
  • Beneish M-Score of -1.64 flags financial patterns consistent with potential earnings manipulation — warrants further investigation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
GOOGL
LUV
Valuation
$73.27B
Free Cash Flow
$-372.38M
1.63%
FCF Yield
-1.59%
28.09
Trailing P/E
31.98
25.39
Forward P/E
10.59
Quality & Moat
20.98%
ROIC
7.83%
38.88%
ROE
10.06%
60.37%
Gross Margin
23.01%
1.47
PEG Ratio
0.32
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
0.45
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.19
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.39
0.24%
Dividend Yield
1.52%
GOOGL: 8Ties: 1LUV: 3
GOOGLLUV

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
GOOGL

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.

LUV

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 →
GOOGL
$9.18
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$288.67B
Δ Market Cap
+$2.65T
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
LUV
$11.48
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$114.0M
Δ Market Cap
+$1.31B
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 →
GOOGL
289.6% Overvalued
Price is 289.6% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $368.03
Fair Value: $94.46
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
LUV
22.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 22.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $47.97
Fair Value: $62.25
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
GOOGL

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $368?

+22.9%
Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

Market pricing in significantly higher growth than history — aggressive.

LUV

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
GOOGL
89/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by roic consistency. 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.
LUV
37/100
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 →
GOOGL
-2.92
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.
LUV
-1.64
Likely 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 →
GOOGL
Insiders 1.2%Institutions 80.8%Retail & Other 18.1%
No. of Institutional Holders7,263
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.
LUV
Insiders 1.0%Institutions 89.5%Retail & Other 9.5%
No. of Institutional Holders1,130
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 →
GOOGL
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
LUV
0
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $145,455
SARETSKY GREGG A
Director
$100,447
@ $30.03 · 2025-08-06
FEINBERG SARAH
Director
$45,008
@ $30.01 · 2025-08-05
SARETSKY GREGG A
Director
$100,169
@ $27.29 · 2025-04-30
BREBER PIERRE R.
Director
$268,877
@ $26.89 · 2025-04-29
HESS DAVID P
Director
$198,900
@ $26.52 · 2025-04-28
FEINBERG SARAH
Director
$15,740
@ $31.48 · 2025-03-14
WATSON PATRICIA A
Director
$99,935
@ $30.58 · 2025-03-13
REYNOLDS CHRISTOPHER P.
Director
$99,955
@ $30.68 · 2025-03-13
CUSH C DAVID
Director
$150,150
@ $30.03 · 2025-03-12
ATHERTON LISA M
Director
$3,691
@ $31.28 · 2025-01-30
GANGWAL RAKESH
Director
$7.11M
@ $29.39 · 2024-10-01
GANGWAL RAKESH
Director
$4.83M
@ $29.15 · 2024-10-01
GANGWAL RAKESH
Director
$3.75M
@ $29.49 · 2024-10-01
GANGWAL RAKESH
Director
$15.87M
@ $29.89 · 2024-10-01
GANGWAL RAKESH
Director
$19.30M
@ $29.98 · 2024-10-01
KELLY GARY C
Officer and Director
$1.00M
@ $29.52 · 2024-09-30
GANGWAL RAKESH
Director
$34.92M
@ $29.47 · 2024-09-30
GANGWAL RAKESH
Director
$20.93M
@ $29.65 · 2024-09-30
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 →
GOOGL
0
Sells (3M)
0
Sells (12M)
No open market insider sales found.
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
LUV
0
Sells (3M)
1
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $302,056
JONES JUSTIN
Officer
$302,056
@ $37.36 · 2025-12-05
RUTHERFORD LINDA B
Officer
$132,386
@ $34.39 · 2024-12-06
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 →
GOOGL
FearGreed
😐Neutral(58/100)

"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.
LUV
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.

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 →
GOOGL
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 (58)
LUV
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)
View GOOGL Full AnalysisView LUV Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: GOOGL vs LUV

Is Alphabet Inc. or Southwest Airlines Co. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, LUV trades at a 27.3% margin of safety (intrinsic value $66 vs. price $48), compared to GOOGL's -289.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $94 vs. $368).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Alphabet Inc. or Southwest Airlines Co.?

GOOGL scores 89/100 (Wide moat), while LUV scores 37/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Southwest Airlines Co. in financial distress?

LUV's Altman Z-Score of 2.2 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. GOOGL scores 2.4 (Grey 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, Alphabet Inc. or Southwest Airlines Co.?

Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) generates a 1.6% free cash flow yield, compared to Southwest Airlines Co.'s -1.6%. 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, Alphabet Inc. or Southwest Airlines Co.?

GOOGL earns 21.0% ROIC versus LUV's 7.8%. 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, Alphabet Inc.'s or Southwest Airlines Co.'s?

GOOGL's dividend earns a safety score of 88/100 (Very Safe), compared to LUV's 46/100 (Borderline). GOOGL has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

Does Southwest Airlines Co. have accounting red flags?

LUV's Beneish M-Score of -1.6 flags it as a likely earnings manipulator (above the -1.78 threshold). By contrast, GOOGL scores -2.9, within the normal range. The Beneish model detects aggressive accounting through eight financial ratios.