Compare StocksHOOD vs INTU

Robinhood Markets, Inc. (HOOD) vs Intuit Inc. (INTU): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, HOOD is undervalued at $108, with a DCF intrinsic value of $168 and a margin of safety of 36%. INTU is undervalued at $267, with an intrinsic value of $536 and a margin of safety of 50%. Of the two, INTU has the wider margin of safety.

HOOD
Robinhood Markets, Inc.
$108.15
VS
INTU
Intuit Inc.
$267.00

Rewards

HOOD
  • Gross margin of 92.2% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $11.86 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
INTU
  • Gross margin of 80.8% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Intuit Inc. scores 79/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 18.5% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.

Risks

HOOD
  • Despite buyback spending, shares outstanding increased in 2 out of 3 years — stock-based compensation is offsetting repurchases.
  • PEG ratio of 2.71 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • Beneish M-Score of -1.59 flags financial patterns consistent with potential earnings manipulation — warrants further investigation.
INTU
  • FCF yield of 7.2% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
HOOD
INTU
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$5.23B
N/A
FCF Yield
7.16%
52.50
Trailing P/E
16.30
37.37
Forward P/E
9.77
Quality & Moat
6.03%
ROIC
28.21%
21.46%
ROE
22.50%
92.24%
Gross Margin
80.79%
2.71
PEG Ratio
0.73
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
0.01
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
N/A
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.02
0.00%
Dividend Yield
1.71%
HOOD: 2Ties: 2INTU: 5
HOODINTU

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
HOOD

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.

INTU

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 →
HOOD
$34.39
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$2.75B
Δ Market Cap
+$94.67B
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
INTU
$12.31
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$6.10B
Δ Market Cap
+$75.17B
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 →
HOOD
35.6% Margin of Safety
Price is 35.6% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $108.15
Fair Value: $167.81
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
INTU
50.2% Margin of Safety
Price is 50.2% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $267.00
Fair Value: $535.61
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
HOOD

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

INTU

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $267?

+4.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +2.8%

The market implies +4.7% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +2.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
HOOD
45/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency 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.
INTU
79/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. ROIC Consistency 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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
HOOD
-1.59
Likely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone
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.
INTU
-2.65
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 →
HOOD
Insiders 0.7%Institutions 73.5%Retail & Other 25.7%
No. of Institutional Holders1,739
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.
INTU
Insiders 2.4%Institutions 92.3%Retail & Other 5.4%
No. of Institutional Holders2,820
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 →
HOOD
3
Buys (3M)
3
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $55.31M
MALKA MEYER
Director
$20.18M
@ $80.74 · 2026-06-05
MALKA MEYER
Director
$15.10M
@ $83.45 · 2026-06-03
MALKA MEYER
Director
$20.02M
@ $80.39 · 2026-05-28
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
INTU
1
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $541,665
PRABHU VASANT M.
Director
$541,665
@ $309.52 · 2026-05-26
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 →
HOOD
11
Sells (3M)
46
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $745.58M
VERMA SHIV
Chief Financial Officer
$393,779
@ $98.84 · 2026-06-15
QUIRK STEVEN M
Officer
$931,024
@ $85.91 · 2026-06-03
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$836,771
@ $83.68 · 2026-06-03
VERMA SHIV
Chief Financial Officer
$420,536
@ $77.36 · 2026-05-15
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$768,908
@ $76.89 · 2026-05-04
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$489,687
@ $83.92 · 2026-04-27
VERMA SHIV
Chief Financial Officer
$466,717
@ $85.86 · 2026-04-15
QUIRK STEVEN M
Officer
$725,302
@ $84.93 · 2026-04-15
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$407,575
@ $69.85 · 2026-04-06
TENEV VLADIMIR
Chief Executive Officer
$26.19M
@ $69.83 · 2026-04-06
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$698,451
@ $69.85 · 2026-04-06
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$416,392
@ $71.36 · 2026-03-20
VERMA SHIV
Chief Financial Officer
$407,855
@ $75.00 · 2026-03-16
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$469,822
@ $80.50 · 2026-03-05
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$754,903
@ $75.49 · 2026-03-03
VERMA SHIV
Chief Financial Officer
$411,274
@ $75.13 · 2026-02-17
WARNICK JASON
Former
$10.64M
@ $85.09 · 2026-02-09
QUIRK STEVEN M
Officer
$4.61M
@ $87.81 · 2026-02-03
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$870,665
@ $87.07 · 2026-02-03
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$630,284
@ $107.48 · 2026-01-26
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$712,984
@ $121.59 · 2026-01-05
TENEV VLADIMIR
Chief Executive Officer
$45.61M
@ $121.63 · 2026-01-05
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$1.22M
@ $121.58 · 2026-01-05
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$717,689
@ $122.39 · 2025-12-22
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$775,711
@ $132.26 · 2025-12-05
QUIRK STEVEN M
Officer
$6.55M
@ $131.15 · 2025-12-03
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$15.86M
@ $132.13 · 2025-12-03
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$6.07M
@ $121.33 · 2025-11-26
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$1.13M
@ $112.98 · 2025-11-24
WARNICK JASON
Chief Financial Officer
$39.84M
@ $132.81 · 2025-11-11
QUIRK STEVEN M
Officer
$6.80M
@ $140.61 · 2025-11-04
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$3.65M
@ $145.95 · 2025-11-03
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$861,460
@ $146.91 · 2025-10-27
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$865,118
@ $147.53 · 2025-10-06
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$3.71M
@ $148.34 · 2025-10-03
TENEV VLADIMIR
Chief Executive Officer
$104.80M
@ $139.73 · 2025-10-01
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$727,872
@ $124.13 · 2025-09-22
TENEV VLADIMIR
Chief Executive Officer
$403.97M
@ $114.57 · 2025-09-15
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$585,514
@ $99.83 · 2025-09-05
QUIRK STEVEN M
Officer
$6.07M
@ $100.91 · 2025-09-03
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$2.52M
@ $100.92 · 2025-09-03
WARNICK JASON
Chief Financial Officer
$11.09M
@ $110.93 · 2025-08-15
QUIRK STEVEN M
Officer
$4.20M
@ $104.71 · 2025-08-05
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$2.61M
@ $104.23 · 2025-08-04
GALLAGHER DANIEL MARTIN JR
Officer
$22.49M
@ $99.97 · 2025-08-01
PINNER JEFFREY TSVI
Chief Technology Officer
$614,141
@ $104.73 · 2025-07-25
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
INTU
1
Sells (3M)
16
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $11.47M
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$289,448
@ $288.29 · 2026-06-11
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$457,046
@ $457.50 · 2026-03-12
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$840,097
@ $629.76 · 2026-01-05
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$741,172
@ $675.02 · 2025-12-19
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$219,763
@ $659.95 · 2025-12-11
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$435,354
@ $653.68 · 2025-12-10
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$792,160
@ $677.06 · 2025-10-03
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$665,951
@ $666.62 · 2025-09-11
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$27,930
@ $665.00 · 2025-08-25
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$255,887
@ $768.43 · 2025-07-10
DALZELL RICHARD L
Director
$521,891
@ $783.62 · 2025-07-09
BALAZS ALEX G
Chief Technology Officer
$689,400
@ $782.52 · 2025-07-08
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$2.03M
@ $782.22 · 2025-07-03
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$1.25M
@ $773.90 · 2025-07-02
NOTARAINNI MARK PHILLIP
Officer
$887,583
@ $774.51 · 2025-07-02
HOTZ LAUREN DALE
Officer
$1.36M
@ $784.24 · 2025-06-27
BALAZS ALEX G
Chief Technology Officer
$1.12M
@ $771.24 · 2025-06-05
TESSEL MARIANNA
Officer
$26.12M
@ $760.84 · 2025-06-03
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$19.29M
@ $752.25 · 2025-05-29
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$30.46M
@ $738.61 · 2025-05-28
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$11.66M
@ $726.15 · 2025-05-27
NOTARAINNI MARK PHILLIP
Officer
$340,143
@ $725.25 · 2025-05-27
MCLEAN KERRY JEAN
General Counsel
$12.18M
@ $729.16 · 2025-05-27
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$5.00M
@ $612.45 · 2025-03-24
TESSEL MARIANNA
Officer
$4.43M
@ $600.13 · 2025-03-21
BURTON EVE B
Director
$1.02M
@ $600.00 · 2025-03-20
HOTZ LAUREN DALE
Officer
$667,838
@ $619.52 · 2025-01-10
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$814,350
@ $626.42 · 2025-01-08
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$2.94M
@ $613.70 · 2025-01-07
AUJLA SANDEEP S
Chief Financial Officer
$68,506
@ $628.50 · 2025-01-03
NOTARAINNI MARK PHILLIP
Officer
$228,121
@ $630.17 · 2025-01-03
BALAZS ALEX G
Chief Technology Officer
$15.86M
@ $665.98 · 2024-12-12
FENNELL LAURA A
Officer
$5.06M
@ $657.64 · 2024-12-10
MCLEAN KERRY JEAN
General Counsel
$11.16M
@ $650.78 · 2024-12-09
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 →
HOOD
FearGreed
😐Neutral(45/100)

"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.
INTU
FearGreed
😨Fear(25/100)

"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 →
HOOD
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 (45)
INTU
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 (25)
View HOOD Full AnalysisView INTU Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: HOOD vs INTU

Is Robinhood Markets, Inc. or Intuit Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, INTU trades at a 50.2% margin of safety (intrinsic value $536 vs. price $267), compared to HOOD's 35.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $168 vs. $108).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Robinhood Markets, Inc. or Intuit Inc.?

INTU scores 79/100 (Wide moat), while HOOD scores 45/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Robinhood Markets, Inc. in financial distress?

HOOD's Altman Z-Score of 2.6 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. INTU scores 8.3 (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, Robinhood Markets, Inc. or Intuit Inc.?

INTU earns 28.2% ROIC versus HOOD's 6.0%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Does Robinhood Markets, Inc. have accounting red flags?

HOOD's Beneish M-Score of -1.6 flags it as a likely earnings manipulator (above the -1.78 threshold). By contrast, INTU scores -2.6, within the normal range. The Beneish model detects aggressive accounting through eight financial ratios.