Compare Stocks › GS vs LOW

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) vs Lowe's Companies, Inc. (LOW): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-11-01, GS is undervalued at $895, with a DCF intrinsic value of $1584 and a margin of safety of 44%. LOW is overvalued at $209, with an intrinsic value of $155 and a margin of safety of -35%. Of the two, GS has the wider margin of safety.

GS
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
$894.55
VS
LOW
Lowe's Companies, Inc.
$209.07

Rewards

GS
  • ★Gross margin of 81.3% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • ★Share count has been reduced by 11% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.58 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
LOW
  • ★Lowe's Companies, Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • ★Lowe's Companies, Inc. scores 80/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with margin stability as the strongest competitive dimension.

Risks

GS
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.25 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
  • ⚠5 insider sales totaling $12.2M with no purchases in the past 3 months — insiders are reducing their exposure.
LOW
  • ⚠Each dollar of retained earnings has produced only $0.05 of earning power — shareholders may have been better served by dividends.
  • ⚠FCF yield of 6.5% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • ⚠Beneish M-Score of 8.81 flags financial patterns consistent with potential earnings manipulation — warrants further investigation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
GS
LOW
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$7.65B
N/A
FCF Yield
6.52%
12.86
Trailing P/E
17.67
12.07
Forward P/E
16.10
Quality & Moat
2.23%
ROIC
22.72%
17.75%
ROE
N/A
81.29%
Gross Margin
32.99%
1.12
PEG Ratio
1.33
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
N/A
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
N/A
Net Debt / EBITDA
3.05
2.24%
Dividend Yield
2.39%
GS: 4Ties: 1LOW: 2
GSLOW

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
GS

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.

LOW

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 →
GS
$5.60
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$26.00B
Δ Market Cap
+$145.60B
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
LOW
$-1.21
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$13.60B
Δ Market Cap
$-16.47B
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 →
GS
43.5% Margin of Safety
Price is 43.5% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $894.55
Fair Value: $1584.20
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
LOW
35.1% Overvalued
Price is 35.1% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $209.07
Fair Value: $154.73
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
GS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

LOW

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $209?

+9.9%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +8.0%

The market implies +9.9% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +8.0%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
GS
65/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability would strengthen the moat.

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.
LOW
80/100
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 →
GS
-2.00
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.
LOW
8.81
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 →
GS
Insiders 0.6%Institutions 75.7%Retail & Other 23.7%
No. of Institutional Holders3,978
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.
LOW
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 81.0%Retail & Other 18.9%
No. of Institutional Holders3,241
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 →
GS
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
HESS JOHN B JR.
Director
$2.00M
@ $511.68 · 2025-04-15
JOHNSON KEVIN RONALD
Director
$1.49M
@ $619.02 · 2025-01-17
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
LOW
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $231,063
SIMKINS LAWRENCE
Director
$231,063
@ $231.06 · 2025-11-24
SIMKINS LAWRENCE
Director
$245,532
@ $245.53 · 2024-12-20
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 →
GS
5
Sells (3M)
19
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $76.92M
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$229,305
@ $917.22 · 2026-10-28
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$10.93M
@ $910.72 · 2026-10-27
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$222,562
@ $890.25 · 2026-10-22
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$620,280
@ $1033.80 · 2026-08-28
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$184,445
@ $1053.97 · 2026-08-04
LESLIE ERICKA T
Officer
$287,951
@ $1151.80 · 2026-07-15
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$6.68M
@ $973.55 · 2026-05-14
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$13.42M
@ $939.07 · 2026-05-06
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$9.57M
@ $929.17 · 2026-05-01
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$634,927
@ $929.61 · 2026-05-01
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.23M
@ $930.70 · 2026-05-01
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$1.04M
@ $936.18 · 2026-04-23
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$1.02M
@ $919.19 · 2026-04-17
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$10.94M
@ $941.57 · 2026-02-09
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$255,387
@ $938.92 · 2026-01-29
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$2.64M
@ $927.17 · 2026-01-27
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$4.49M
@ $923.75 · 2026-01-23
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$8.89M
@ $927.51 · 2026-01-23
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$1.62M
@ $920.62 · 2026-01-23
WALDRON JOHN E.
President
$13.69M
@ $750.30 · 2025-08-28
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$5.41M
@ $724.40 · 2025-07-25
ROGERS JOHN F W
Officer
$4.31M
@ $717.39 · 2025-07-23
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$4.71M
@ $712.31 · 2025-07-23
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.04M
@ $607.17 · 2025-05-14
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$1.50M
@ $622.15 · 2025-02-26
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$3.31M
@ $636.25 · 2025-01-28
HALIO CAREY
Officer and Treasurer
$2.32M
@ $636.74 · 2025-01-24
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$1.28M
@ $627.01 · 2025-01-21
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$4.76M
@ $634.69 · 2025-01-21
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$965,120
@ $624.67 · 2025-01-21
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$4.00M
@ $610.91 · 2024-11-29
VINIAR DAVID A
Director
$3.06M
@ $612.08 · 2024-11-29
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$1.77M
@ $594.51 · 2024-11-06
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$7.67M
@ $593.03 · 2024-11-06
ROGERS JOHN F W
Officer
$3.83M
@ $596.36 · 2024-11-06
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
LOW
0
Sells (3M)
5
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $13.17M
VAGELL MARGRETHE RAUB
Officer
$559,575
@ $223.83 · 2026-06-18
PRYOR JULIETTE WILLIAMS
Officer
$2.10M
@ $224.81 · 2026-06-17
DUPRE JANICE M.
Officer
$3.14M
@ $221.90 · 2026-06-16
VANCE QUONTA D
Officer
$2.67M
@ $257.54 · 2026-03-04
ELLISON MARVIN R
Chief Executive Officer
$4.70M
@ $261.17 · 2026-01-09
MCFARLAND JOSEPH MICHAEL III
Officer
$11.94M
@ $272.60 · 2025-09-11
SINK BRANDON J.
Chief Financial Officer
$2.20M
@ $268.58 · 2025-09-05
PRYOR JULIETTE WILLIAMS
Officer
$238,939
@ $257.20 · 2025-08-26
ELLISON MARVIN R
Chief Executive Officer
$10.56M
@ $264.10 · 2025-08-20
DUPRE JANICE M.
Officer
$350,039
@ $224.38 · 2025-06-10
PRYOR JULIETTE WILLIAMS
Officer
$257,077
@ $227.50 · 2025-06-03
VANCE QUONTA D
Officer
$1.97M
@ $274.37 · 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 →
GS
FearGreed
😐Neutral(48/100)

"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.
LOW
FearGreed
😐Neutral(50/100)

"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 →
GS
⚪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 (48)
LOW
⚪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 (50)
View GS Full AnalysisView LOW Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: GS vs LOW

Is The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. or Lowe's Companies, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?▼

Based on our discounted cash flow model, GS trades at a 43.5% margin of safety (intrinsic value $1584 vs. price $895), compared to LOW's -35.1% margin of safety (intrinsic $155 vs. $209).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. or Lowe's Companies, Inc.?▼

LOW scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while GS scores 65/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. in financial distress?▼

GS's Altman Z-Score of 0.3 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. LOW scores 3.1 (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 stock has higher return on invested capital, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. or Lowe's Companies, Inc.?▼

LOW earns 22.7% ROIC versus GS's 2.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Which dividend is safer, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.'s or Lowe's Companies, Inc.'s?▼

LOW's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to GS's 79/100 (Safe). LOW has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

Does Lowe's Companies, Inc. have accounting red flags?▼

LOW's Beneish M-Score of 8.8 flags it as a likely earnings manipulator (above the -1.78 threshold). By contrast, GS scores -2.0, within the normal range. The Beneish model detects aggressive accounting through eight financial ratios.