Compare StocksINTU vs PODD

Intuit Inc. (INTU) vs Insulet Corporation (PODD): 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%. PODD is undervalued at $146, with an intrinsic value of $194 and a margin of safety of 25%. Of the two, INTU has the wider margin of safety.

INTU
Intuit Inc.
$267.00
VS
PODD
Insulet Corporation
$145.76

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.
PODD
  • Gross margin of 71.0% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $3.09 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
  • Insiders have bought $0.9M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant skin in the game.

Risks

INTU
  • FCF yield of 7.2% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
PODD

    Key Valuation Metrics

    Learn more →
    INTU
    PODD
    Valuation
    $5.23B
    Free Cash Flow
    $349.90M
    7.16%
    FCF Yield
    3.47%
    16.30
    Trailing P/E
    34.06
    9.77
    Forward P/E
    18.04
    Quality & Moat
    28.21%
    ROIC
    15.86%
    22.50%
    ROE
    23.00%
    80.79%
    Gross Margin
    71.01%
    0.73
    PEG Ratio
    1.30
    Balance Sheet Safety
    0.01
    Net Debt / Equity
    0.41
    N/A
    Interest Coverage
    N/A
    0.02
    Net Debt / EBITDA
    0.89
    1.71%
    Dividend Yield
    0.00%
    INTU: 10Ties: 2PODD: 0
    INTUPODD

    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.

    PODD

    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
    PODD
    $-0.52
    created per $1 retained over 3 years
    Market Cap Declined
    Σ Retained
    $871.7M
    Δ Market Cap
    $-455.5M
    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
    PODD
    25.0% Margin of Safety
    Price is 25.0% below estimated fair value
    Current Price: $145.76
    Fair Value: $194.46
    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.

    PODD

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $146?

    +18.1%
    Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
    Standard FCF implies +13.4%

    The market implies +18.1% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

    Standard FCF implies a more demanding +13.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

    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.
    PODD
    55/100
    Narrow Moat
    70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

    Narrow moat with revenue predictability 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.
    PODD
    -2.51
    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.
    PODD
    Insiders 0.3%Institutions 105.5%
    No. of Institutional Holders1,170
    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
    PODD
    2
    Buys (3M)
    4
    Buys (12M)
    Total value (12M): $1.70M
    WEATHERMAN ELIZABETH H
    Director
    $497,490
    @ $144.20 · 2026-06-03
    STONESIFER TIMOTHY C
    Director
    $400,393
    @ $143.51 · 2026-06-03
    MINOGUE MICHAEL R
    Director
    $499,847
    @ $246.23 · 2026-02-25
    STONESIFER TIMOTHY C
    Director
    $299,884
    @ $311.73 · 2025-12-05
    CHADWICK ANA MARIA
    Chief Financial Officer
    $20,600
    @ $206.00 · 2024-08-29
    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
    PODD
    1
    Sells (3M)
    6
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $2.97M
    BORIO LUCIANA
    Director
    $59,887
    @ $143.27 · 2026-06-03
    FREDERICK WAYNE A.I.
    Director
    $542,510
    @ $293.09 · 2025-12-15
    SINGH PREM
    Officer
    $238,726
    @ $347.49 · 2025-09-08
    COUSIN LAETITIA
    Officer
    $278,002
    @ $348.81 · 2025-09-08
    BENJAMIN ERIC
    Officer
    $1.42M
    @ $332.23 · 2025-08-21
    SINGH PREM
    Officer
    $429,760
    @ $320.00 · 2025-08-07
    MANEA DANIEL
    Officer
    $390,065
    @ $300.05 · 2025-06-13
    SINGH PREM
    Officer
    $698,216
    @ $300.05 · 2025-06-13
    BORIO LUCIANA
    Director
    $147,056
    @ $305.73 · 2025-06-09
    KAPPLES JOHN W.
    General Counsel
    $1.68M
    @ $318.47 · 2025-05-14
    BENJAMIN ERIC
    Officer
    $960,320
    @ $320.00 · 2025-05-13
    HOPFIELD JESSICA
    Director
    $1.66M
    @ $317.54 · 2025-05-13
    FREDERICK WAYNE A.I.
    Director
    $501,875
    @ $275.00 · 2025-03-25
    BENJAMIN ERIC
    Officer
    $3.47M
    @ $280.00 · 2025-01-21
    BENJAMIN ERIC
    Officer
    $1.17M
    @ $267.60 · 2024-12-16
    BUDDEN LAUREN
    Officer
    $252,192
    @ $275.62 · 2024-12-10
    BORIO LUCIANA
    Director
    $139,598
    @ $274.80 · 2024-11-12
    HOPFIELD JESSICA
    Director
    $1.72M
    @ $225.26 · 2024-09-11
    SCANNELL TIMOTHY J.
    Director
    $1.13M
    @ $225.84 · 2024-09-10
    BUDDEN LAUREN
    Officer
    $333,443
    @ $221.41 · 2024-09-09
    FIELD MARK N
    Chief Technology Officer
    $305,463
    @ $220.87 · 2024-09-09
    SINGH PREM
    Officer
    $368,940
    @ $202.27 · 2024-08-30
    FIELD MARK N
    Chief Technology Officer
    $281,561
    @ $203.00 · 2024-08-28
    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.
    PODD
    FearGreed
    😨Fear(30/100)

    "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 →
    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)
    PODD
    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 (30)
    View INTU Full AnalysisView PODD Full Analysis

    Frequently Asked Questions: INTU vs PODD

    Is Intuit Inc. or Insulet Corporation 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 PODD's 25.0% margin of safety (intrinsic $194 vs. $146).

    Which stock has a wider economic moat, Intuit Inc. or Insulet Corporation?

    INTU scores 79/100 (Wide moat), while PODD scores 55/100 (Narrow 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 Insulet Corporation?

    Intuit Inc. (INTU) generates a 7.2% free cash flow yield, compared to Insulet Corporation's 3.5%. 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 Insulet Corporation?

    INTU earns 28.2% ROIC versus PODD's 15.9%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.