Compare StocksGOOGL vs WAT

Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) vs Waters Corporation (WAT): 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%. WAT is overvalued at $355, with an intrinsic value of $172 and a margin of safety of -107%. Of the two, WAT has the wider margin of safety.

GOOGL
Alphabet Inc.
$368.03
VS
WAT
Waters Corporation
$355.44

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.
WAT
  • Waters Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Waters Corporation scores 89/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with margin stability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Return on equity has consistently exceeded 20% over 4 years, indicating efficient use of shareholder capital.

Risks

GOOGL
  • FCF yield of 1.6% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
WAT
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has produced only $0.16 of earning power — shareholders may have been better served by dividends.
  • Despite buyback spending, shares outstanding increased in 3 out of 4 years — stock-based compensation is offsetting repurchases.
  • Trailing P/E of 45.2x is 40% above the historical average of 32.2x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
GOOGL
WAT
Valuation
$73.27B
Free Cash Flow
$-502.37M
1.63%
FCF Yield
-1.44%
28.09
Trailing P/E
45.22
25.39
Forward P/E
21.60
Quality & Moat
20.98%
ROIC
0.41%
38.88%
ROE
5.21%
60.37%
Gross Margin
55.15%
1.47
PEG Ratio
1.60
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
0.34
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.19
Net Debt / EBITDA
4.53
0.24%
Dividend Yield
0.00%
GOOGL: 10Ties: 1WAT: 1
GOOGLWAT

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.

WAT

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
WAT
$1.23
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Value Creator
Σ Retained
$1.92B
Δ Market Cap
+$2.37B
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
WAT
106.5% Overvalued
Price is 106.5% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $355.44
Fair Value: $172.12
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.

WAT

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.
WAT
89/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. Margin Stability 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.

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.
WAT
-2.37
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 →
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.
WAT
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 99.7%Retail & Other 0.2%
No. of Institutional Holders1,610
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
WAT
0
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $451,070
JIANG WEI
Director
$144,730
@ $289.46 · 2026-03-16
FEARON RICHARD H
Director
$306,340
@ $306.34 · 2026-03-06
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
WAT
0
Sells (3M)
0
Sells (12M)
No open market insider sales found.
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.
WAT
FearGreed
😐Neutral(46/100)

"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)
WAT
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 (46)
View GOOGL Full AnalysisView WAT Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: GOOGL vs WAT

Is Alphabet Inc. or Waters Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, WAT trades at a -106.5% margin of safety (intrinsic value $172 vs. price $355), compared to GOOGL's -289.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $94 vs. $368).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Alphabet Inc. or Waters Corporation?

WAT scores 89/100 (Wide moat), while GOOGL scores 89/100 (Wide 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. WAT scores 9.6 (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, Alphabet Inc. or Waters Corporation?

Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) generates a 1.6% free cash flow yield, compared to Waters Corporation's -1.4%. 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 Waters Corporation?

GOOGL earns 21.0% ROIC versus WAT's 0.4%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.