Compare Stocks › GOOGL vs LVS

Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) vs Las Vegas Sands Corp. (LVS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-11-01, GOOGL is overvalued at $280, with a DCF intrinsic value of $8 and a margin of safety of -3448%. LVS is undervalued at $37, with an intrinsic value of $53 and a margin of safety of 30%. Of the two, LVS has the wider margin of safety.

GOOGL
Alphabet Inc.
$279.84
VS
LVS
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
$36.97

Rewards

GOOGL
  • ★Alphabet Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • ★Gross margin of 60.9% 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.
LVS
  • ★Gross margin of 78.6% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • ★Return on equity has consistently exceeded 20% over 4 years, indicating efficient use of shareholder capital.
  • ★Share count has been reduced by 12% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.

Risks

GOOGL
    LVS
    • ⚠13 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.

    Key Valuation Metrics

    Learn more →
    GOOGL
    LVS
    Valuation
    $-1.16B
    Free Cash Flow
    $2.11B
    -0.03%
    FCF Yield
    8.80%
    14.61
    Trailing P/E
    15.15
    18.49
    Forward P/E
    11.95
    Quality & Moat
    14.30%
    ROIC
    13.45%
    44.29%
    ROE
    207.08%
    60.86%
    Gross Margin
    78.63%
    0.98
    PEG Ratio
    0.97
    Balance Sheet Safety
    Net cash
    Net Debt / Equity
    N/A
    N/A
    Interest Coverage
    N/A
    -0.62
    Net Debt / EBITDA
    2.83
    0.31%
    Dividend Yield
    3.25%
    GOOGL: 2Ties: 3LVS: 6
    GOOGLLVS

    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.

    LVS

    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
    LVS
    $2.81
    created per $1 retained over 3 years
    Exceptional Value Creator
    Σ Retained
    $2.57B
    Δ Market Cap
    +$7.20B
    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
    3447.8% Overvalued
    Price is 3447.8% above estimated fair value
    Current Price: $279.84
    Fair Value: $7.89
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued
    LVS
    30.5% Margin of Safety
    Price is 30.5% below estimated fair value
    Current Price: $36.97
    Fair Value: $53.17
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued

    Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

    Learn more →
    GOOGL

    Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

    LVS

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $37?

    +7.0%
    Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
    Standard FCF implies +5.8%

    The market implies +7.0% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

    Standard FCF implies a demanding +5.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

    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.
    LVS
    38/100
    No Moat
    70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

    No durable moat detected, though roic consistency 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.
    LVS
    -2.17
    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 →
    GOOGL
    Insiders 1.6%Institutions 80.8%Retail & Other 17.6%
    No. of Institutional Holders7,451
    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.
    LVS
    Insiders 63.7%Institutions 43.8%
    No. of Institutional Holders1,037
    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
    LVS
    0
    Buys (3M)
    0
    Buys (12M)
    PANT MUKTESH
    Director
    $1.00M
    @ $43.51 · 2025-03-14
    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
    LVS
    0
    Sells (3M)
    13
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $237.49M
    FORMAN CHARLES D
    Director
    $616,626
    @ $54.09 · 2026-04-27
    DUMONT PATRICK
    Chief Executive Officer
    $3.29M
    @ $54.75 · 2026-03-17
    GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
    Chief Executive Officer
    $83.39M
    @ $66.71 · 2025-12-17
    GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
    Chief Executive Officer
    $50.09M
    @ $66.79 · 2025-12-15
    GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
    Chief Executive Officer
    $26.57M
    @ $66.42 · 2025-12-11
    DUMONT PATRICK
    President
    $9.22M
    @ $67.96 · 2025-12-03
    DUMONT PATRICK
    President
    $15.91M
    @ $69.88 · 2025-12-02
    HUDSON D. ZACHARY
    Officer
    $3.75M
    @ $70.37 · 2025-12-01
    CHAFETZ IRWIN
    Director
    $2.09M
    @ $69.76 · 2025-12-01
    GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
    Chief Executive Officer
    $7.02M
    @ $70.17 · 2025-12-01
    HYZAK RANDY A.
    Chief Financial Officer
    $3.82M
    @ $66.45 · 2025-11-25
    HUDSON D. ZACHARY
    Officer
    $6.50M
    @ $64.99 · 2025-11-07
    GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
    Chief Executive Officer
    $25.22M
    @ $63.04 · 2025-11-06
    GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
    Chief Executive Officer
    $23.68M
    @ $59.20 · 2025-10-31
    GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
    Chief Executive Officer
    $53.02M
    @ $58.92 · 2025-10-30
    GOLDSTEIN ROBERT G
    Chief Executive Officer
    $17.80M
    @ $59.32 · 2025-10-27
    FORMAN CHARLES D
    Director
    $1.08M
    @ $54.13 · 2025-09-10
    FORMAN CHARLES D
    Director
    $526,300
    @ $52.63 · 2025-08-06
    HUDSON D. ZACHARY
    Officer
    $1.33M
    @ $51.40 · 2024-11-27
    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
    😨Fear(23/100)

    "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.
    LVS
    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.

    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: Fear (23)
    LVS
    ⚪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)
    View GOOGL Full AnalysisView LVS Full Analysis

    Frequently Asked Questions: GOOGL vs LVS

    Is Alphabet Inc. or Las Vegas Sands Corp. more undervalued in 2026?▼

    Based on our discounted cash flow model, LVS trades at a 30.5% margin of safety (intrinsic value $53 vs. price $37), compared to GOOGL's -3447.8% margin of safety (intrinsic $8 vs. $280).

    Which stock has a wider economic moat, Alphabet Inc. or Las Vegas Sands Corp.?▼

    GOOGL scores 89/100 (Wide moat), while LVS scores 38/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

    Is Alphabet Inc. in financial distress?▼

    GOOGL's Altman Z-Score of 2.4 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. LVS scores 2.7 (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 Las Vegas Sands Corp.?▼

    Las Vegas Sands Corp. (LVS) generates a 8.8% free cash flow yield, compared to Alphabet Inc.'s -0.0%. 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 Las Vegas Sands Corp.?▼

    GOOGL earns 14.3% ROIC versus LVS's 13.4%. 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 Las Vegas Sands Corp.'s?▼

    GOOGL's dividend earns a safety score of 88/100 (Very Safe), compared to LVS's 81/100 (Very Safe). GOOGL has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

    GOOGL vs LVS: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io