The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) vs Uber Technologies, Inc. (UBER): 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%. UBER is undervalued at $65, with an intrinsic value of $385 and a margin of safety of 83%. Of the two, UBER has the wider margin of safety.
Rewards
- ★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.
- ★Free cash flow has grown at a 192.5% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
- ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $9.64 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
- ★Insiders have bought $15.3M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant skin in the game.
Risks
- ⚠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.
- ⚠FCF yield of 7.3% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
- ⚠PEG ratio of 5.67 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
Key Valuation Metrics
Learn more →Historical Fundamentals
Learn more →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.
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 →> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
> $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 →Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth
Learn more →Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.
What growth rate is the market pricing in at $65?
The market implies +2.5% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.
Standard FCF implies a more demanding +3.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.
Economic Moat Score
Learn more →Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability would strengthen the moat.
Narrow moat with revenue predictability as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability would strengthen the moat.
Forensic Accounting
Learn more →M-Score Trend
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.
Ownership Breakdown
Learn more →High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
Insider Buying Activity
Learn more →Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.
Insider Selling Activity
Learn more →Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.
🎭 Mr. Market's Mood
Learn more →"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"
"Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"
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 →The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
Frequently Asked Questions: GS vs UBER
Is The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. or Uber Technologies, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?▼
Based on our discounted cash flow model, UBER trades at a 83.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $385 vs. price $65), compared to GS's 43.5% margin of safety (intrinsic $1584 vs. $895).
Which stock has a wider economic moat, The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. or Uber Technologies, Inc.?▼
GS scores 65/100 (Narrow moat), while UBER scores 47/100 (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. UBER scores 3.9 (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 Uber Technologies, Inc.?▼
UBER earns 13.5% 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.