Compare StocksINTU vs LOW

Intuit Inc. (INTU) vs Lowe's Companies, Inc. (LOW): 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%. LOW is overvalued at $222, with an intrinsic value of $182 and a margin of safety of -22%. Of the two, INTU has the wider margin of safety.

INTU
Intuit Inc.
$267.00
VS
LOW
Lowe's Companies, Inc.
$222.20

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.
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

INTU
  • FCF yield of 7.2% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
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 6.1% 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 →
INTU
LOW
Valuation
$5.23B
Free Cash Flow
$7.65B
7.16%
FCF Yield
6.14%
16.30
Trailing P/E
18.78
9.77
Forward P/E
16.49
Quality & Moat
28.21%
ROIC
18.17%
22.50%
ROE
N/A
80.79%
Gross Margin
33.29%
0.73
PEG Ratio
1.46
Balance Sheet Safety
0.01
Net Debt / Equity
N/A
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
0.02
Net Debt / EBITDA
3.32
1.71%
Dividend Yield
2.23%
INTU: 7Ties: 1LOW: 2
INTULOW

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.

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 →
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
LOW
$-0.67
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$13.60B
Δ Market Cap
$-9.11B
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
LOW
22.0% Overvalued
Price is 22.0% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $222.20
Fair Value: $182.09
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.

LOW

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $222?

+10.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +8.8%

The market implies +10.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +8.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

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.
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 →
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.
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 →
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.
LOW
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 81.3%Retail & Other 18.6%
No. of Institutional Holders3,367
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
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 →
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
LOW
0
Sells (3M)
6
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $32.32M
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
MCFARLAND JOSEPH MICHAEL III
Officer
$1.08M
@ $270.74 · 2024-10-03
GODBOLE SEEMANTINI P
Chief Technology Officer
$7.12M
@ $271.73 · 2024-10-03
VAGELL MARGRETHE R
Officer
$1.56M
@ $271.45 · 2024-10-02
GRIGGS DAN CLAYTON JR.
Officer
$1.68M
@ $248.82 · 2024-09-12
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.
LOW
FearGreed
😐Neutral(47/100)

"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)
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 (47)
View INTU Full AnalysisView LOW Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: INTU vs LOW

Is Intuit Inc. or Lowe's Companies, 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 LOW's -22.0% margin of safety (intrinsic $182 vs. $222).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Intuit Inc. or Lowe's Companies, Inc.?

LOW scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while INTU scores 79/100 (Wide moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Which company has better free cash flow, Intuit Inc. or Lowe's Companies, Inc.?

Intuit Inc. (INTU) generates a 7.2% free cash flow yield, compared to Lowe's Companies, Inc.'s 6.1%. A higher FCF yield means the business converts more of its market value into cash that can be returned to shareholders or reinvested.

Which stock has higher return on invested capital, Intuit Inc. or Lowe's Companies, Inc.?

INTU earns 28.2% ROIC versus LOW's 18.2%. 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 Lowe's Companies, Inc.'s?

LOW's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to INTU's 94/100 (Very 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, INTU scores -2.6, within the normal range. The Beneish model detects aggressive accounting through eight financial ratios.

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