Compare StocksINTU vs LHX

Intuit Inc. (INTU) vs L3Harris Technologies, Inc. (LHX): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, INTU is undervalued at $267, with a DCF intrinsic value of $536 and a margin of safety of 50%. LHX is undervalued at $295, with an intrinsic value of $423 and a margin of safety of 30%. Of the two, INTU has the wider margin of safety.

INTU
Intuit Inc.
$267.00
VS
LHX
L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
$294.82

Rewards

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.
LHX
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 12.1% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $4.36 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

Risks

INTU
  • FCF yield of 7.2% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
LHX
  • 9 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
INTU
LHX
Valuation
$5.23B
Free Cash Flow
N/A
7.16%
FCF Yield
N/A
16.30
Trailing P/E
31.98
9.77
Forward P/E
21.63
Quality & Moat
28.21%
ROIC
3.20%
22.50%
ROE
7.01%
80.79%
Gross Margin
30.41%
0.73
PEG Ratio
1.78
Balance Sheet Safety
0.01
Net Debt / Equity
0.30
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
0.02
Net Debt / EBITDA
3.23
1.71%
Dividend Yield
0.92%
INTU: 9Ties: 1LHX: 0
INTULHX

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
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.

LHX

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 →
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
LHX
$9.04
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$1.68B
Δ Market Cap
+$15.16B
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 →
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
LHX
30.3% Margin of Safety
Price is 30.3% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $294.82
Fair Value: $423.25
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
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.

LHX

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
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.
LHX
59/100
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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
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.
LHX
-2.38
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 →
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.
LHX
Insiders 0.4%Institutions 89.4%Retail & Other 10.2%
No. of Institutional Holders2,134
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 →
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
LHX
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
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 →
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
LHX
1
Sells (3M)
9
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $65.34M
RAKITA MELANIE
Officer
$676,781
@ $310.45 · 2026-05-05
RAMBEAU JON
Officer
$2.05M
@ $370.32 · 2026-03-02
MEHTA SAMIR
Officer
$2.05M
@ $370.32 · 2026-03-02
RAKITA MELANIE
Officer
$1.09M
@ $348.38 · 2026-03-02
MEHTA SAMIR
Officer
$1.64M
@ $338.85 · 2026-02-05
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$4.27M
@ $301.05 · 2025-11-13
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$23.23M
@ $279.90 · 2025-09-12
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$10.82M
@ $269.52 · 2025-08-11
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$19.52M
@ $271.14 · 2025-07-29
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$8.76M
@ $248.39 · 2025-06-12
ZOISS EDWARD J
President
$490,000
@ $245.00 · 2025-05-27
RAMBEAU JON
Officer
$718,228
@ $226.00 · 2025-03-10
ZOISS EDWARD J
Officer
$1.09M
@ $211.68 · 2025-03-07
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$288,412
@ $210.06 · 2024-12-30
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$376,879
@ $213.65 · 2024-12-23
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$394,466
@ $223.62 · 2024-12-16
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$845,000
@ $260.00 · 2024-11-08
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$740,815
@ $247.93 · 2024-11-04
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$5.30M
@ $248.11 · 2024-10-31
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$731,104
@ $244.68 · 2024-10-02
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$707,200
@ $236.68 · 2024-09-03
MIKUEN SCOTT T
General Counsel
$6.15M
@ $233.01 · 2024-07-15
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 →
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.
LHX
FearGreed
😐Neutral(44/100)

"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 →
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)
LHX
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 (44)
View INTU Full AnalysisView LHX Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: INTU vs LHX

Is Intuit Inc. or L3Harris Technologies, 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 LHX's 30.3% margin of safety (intrinsic $423 vs. $295).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Intuit Inc. or L3Harris Technologies, Inc.?

INTU scores 79/100 (Wide moat), while LHX scores 59/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is L3Harris Technologies, Inc. in financial distress?

LHX's Altman Z-Score of 2.4 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, Intuit Inc. or L3Harris Technologies, Inc.?

INTU earns 28.2% ROIC versus LHX's 3.2%. 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, Intuit Inc.'s or L3Harris Technologies, Inc.'s?

INTU's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to LHX's 84/100 (Very Safe). INTU has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

INTU vs LHX: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io