Compare Stocks › IP vs MS

International Paper Company (IP) vs Morgan Stanley (MS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-11-01, IP is undervalued at $36, with a DCF intrinsic value of $315 and a margin of safety of 88%. MS is undervalued at $184, with an intrinsic value of $314 and a margin of safety of 41%. Of the two, IP has the wider margin of safety.

IP
International Paper Company
$36.37
VS
MS
Morgan Stanley
$184.30

Rewards

IP
  • ★FCF yield of 12.1% is historically attractive — the business generates significant cash relative to its price.
MS
  • ★Gross margin of 87.3% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • ★Morgan Stanley scores 80/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $3.56 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

Risks

IP
  • ⚠ROIC has declined by 9.7 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • ⚠International Paper Company scores only 17/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
  • ⚠Share count has increased by 51% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.
MS
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.29 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
  • ⚠13 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
IP
MS
Valuation
$2.32B
Free Cash Flow
N/A
12.06%
FCF Yield
N/A
N/A
Trailing P/E
14.62
13.51
Forward P/E
13.50
Quality & Moat
4.83%
ROIC
3.47%
-22.30%
ROE
13.84%
29.78%
Gross Margin
87.31%
1.58
PEG Ratio
1.61
Balance Sheet Safety
0.71
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.46
Net Debt / EBITDA
N/A
5.09%
Dividend Yield
2.50%
IP: 2Ties: 3MS: 3
IPMS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
IP

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.

MS

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 →
IP
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-4.93B
Δ Market Cap
+$8.67B
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
MS
$6.65
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$20.84B
Δ Market Cap
+$138.59B
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 →
IP
88.5% Margin of Safety
Price is 88.5% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $36.37
Fair Value: $315.48
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MS
41.3% Margin of Safety
Price is 41.3% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $184.30
Fair Value: $313.71
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
IP

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $36?

+1.1%
Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

Market pricing in significantly higher growth than history — aggressive.

MS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
IP
17/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though reinvestment efficiency shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.

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.
MS
80/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. Margin Stability 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 →
IP
-2.75
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.
MS
-2.09
Possible 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 →
IP
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 102.7%
No. of Institutional Holders1,199
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.
MS
Insiders 24.4%Institutions 63.5%Retail & Other 12.1%
No. of Institutional Holders3,458
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 →
IP
0
Buys (3M)
4
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $4.32M
TOZIER SCOTT A
Director
$313,009
@ $31.30 · 2026-05-01
GUSTAFSSON PER ANDERS
Director
$1.00M
@ $38.33 · 2026-03-12
CONNOR CHRISTOPHER M
Director
$1.01M
@ $40.37 · 2026-01-30
SILVERNAIL ANDREW K.
Chief Executive Officer
$2.00M
@ $39.98 · 2026-01-30
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
MS
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
PETERSON DOUGLAS L
Director
$5,630
@ $156.39 · 2025-10-17
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 →
IP
2
Sells (3M)
2
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $1.16M
HAMIC WILLIAM THOMAS
President
$1.01M
@ $41.20 · 2026-08-07
GOUGHNOUR HOLLY G
Officer
$146,860
@ $41.96 · 2026-08-04
SAAB JOSEPH R
General Counsel
$409,815
@ $45.53 · 2025-09-16
GOUGHNOUR HOLLY G
Officer
$336,344
@ $44.85 · 2025-05-05
SULLIVAN KATHRYN D.
Director
$35,034
@ $58.39 · 2024-11-29
SULLIVAN KATHRYN D.
Director
$33,714
@ $56.19 · 2024-11-15
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
MS
0
Sells (3M)
13
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $48.28M
SCHAPIRO MARY L
Director
$212,055
@ $212.06 · 2026-07-28
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$5.21M
@ $215.55 · 2026-07-17
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$2.12M
@ $190.75 · 2026-04-20
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$2.78M
@ $189.24 · 2026-04-17
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$3.04M
@ $188.22 · 2026-04-16
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$9.74M
@ $188.59 · 2026-04-16
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$6.02M
@ $182.61 · 2026-01-30
YESHAYA SHARON
Chief Financial Officer
$2.94M
@ $185.77 · 2026-01-20
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$1.55M
@ $182.08 · 2026-01-20
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$3.97M
@ $184.00 · 2026-01-20
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$1.44M
@ $183.45 · 2026-01-20
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$3.69M
@ $184.55 · 2026-01-20
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$5.57M
@ $183.62 · 2026-01-20
PICK EDWARD N.
Chief Executive Officer
$16.43M
@ $164.34 · 2025-10-31
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$2.81M
@ $140.30 · 2025-07-17
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.69M
@ $141.12 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$4.09M
@ $141.13 · 2025-07-17
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.53M
@ $140.62 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$3.70M
@ $127.37 · 2025-05-12
HERZ ROBERT H
Director
$95,459
@ $119.32 · 2025-05-02
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.80M
@ $120.00 · 2025-05-02
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.12M
@ $111.65 · 2025-04-15
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$1.15M
@ $138.06 · 2025-01-22
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.78M
@ $136.20 · 2025-01-21
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$5.00M
@ $136.61 · 2025-01-21
AKRAM RAJA
Chief Financial Officer
$2.38M
@ $136.01 · 2025-01-21
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.52M
@ $136.92 · 2025-01-21
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.20M
@ $136.43 · 2025-01-21
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 →
IP
FearGreed
😐Neutral(43/100)

"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.
MS
FearGreed
😐Neutral(49/100)

"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 →
IP
⚪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 (43)
MS
⚪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 (49)
View IP Full AnalysisView MS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: IP vs MS

Is International Paper Company or Morgan Stanley more undervalued in 2026?▼

Based on our discounted cash flow model, IP trades at a 88.5% margin of safety (intrinsic value $315 vs. price $36), compared to MS's 41.3% margin of safety (intrinsic $314 vs. $184).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, International Paper Company or Morgan Stanley?▼

MS scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while IP scores 17/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Morgan Stanley in financial distress?▼

MS's Altman Z-Score of 0.3 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. IP scores 1.4 (Distress 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, International Paper Company or Morgan Stanley?▼

IP earns 4.8% ROIC versus MS's 3.5%. 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, International Paper Company's or Morgan Stanley's?▼

MS's dividend earns a safety score of 79/100 (Safe), compared to IP's 50/100 (Borderline). MS has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

IP vs MS: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io