Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. (IBKR) vs Tesla, Inc. (TSLA): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?
As of 2026-11-01, IBKR is fairly valued at $77, with a DCF intrinsic value of $86 and a margin of safety of 11%. TSLA is overvalued at $400, with an intrinsic value of $142 and a margin of safety of -181%. Of the two, IBKR has the wider margin of safety.
Rewards
- ★Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
- ★Gross margin of 92.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
- ★Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. scores 81/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
- ★Altman Z-Score of 19.94 indicates very low bankruptcy risk — the company is firmly in the safe zone.
- ★Net debt/EBITDA of -2.9x means the company holds more cash than debt — a net cash position.
Risks
- ⚠Despite buyback spending, shares outstanding increased in 3 out of 4 years — stock-based compensation is offsetting repurchases.
- ⚠Trailing P/E of 29.4x is 34% above the historical average of 21.9x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
- ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.43 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
- ⚠ROIC has declined by 21.5 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
- ⚠Gross margin of 19.3% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
- ⚠Share count has increased by 19% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.
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 $400?
The market implies +51.0% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.
Standard FCF implies a demanding +46.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment.
Economic Moat Score
Learn more →Wide moat driven primarily by roic consistency. Revenue Predictability is the area most vulnerable to competitive pressure.
No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.
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 pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"
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: IBKR vs TSLA
Is Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. or Tesla, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?▼
Based on our discounted cash flow model, IBKR trades at a 10.5% margin of safety (intrinsic value $86 vs. price $77), compared to TSLA's -181.2% margin of safety (intrinsic $142 vs. $400).
Which stock has a wider economic moat, Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. or Tesla, Inc.?▼
IBKR scores 81/100 (Wide moat), while TSLA scores 31/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.
Is Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. in financial distress?▼
IBKR's Altman Z-Score of 0.4 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. TSLA scores 19.9 (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, Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. or Tesla, Inc.?▼
IBKR earns 7.4% ROIC versus TSLA's 4.1%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.