SafetyMargin.ioSafetyMargin.io
BlogWatchlistCompare
Compare Stocks › IR vs MS

Ingersoll Rand Inc. (IR) vs Morgan Stanley (MS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, IR is overvalued at $78, with a DCF intrinsic value of $49 and a margin of safety of -58%. MS is undervalued at $223, with an intrinsic value of $298 and a margin of safety of 25%. Of the two, MS has the wider margin of safety.

IR
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
$77.91
VS
MS
Morgan Stanley
$223.17

Rewards

IR
  • ★Free cash flow has grown at a 16.8% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • ★PEG ratio of 0.75 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.
MS
  • ★Gross margin of 87.4% 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

IR
  • ⚠Each dollar of retained earnings has produced only $0.05 of earning power — shareholders may have been better served by dividends.
  • ⚠Insiders have sold $2.7M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.
MS
  • ⚠Trailing P/E of 20.2x is 26% above the historical average of 16.1x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • ⚠PEG ratio of 2.66 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.29 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
IR
MS
Valuation
$1.04B
Free Cash Flow
N/A
3.40%
FCF Yield
N/A
52.64
Trailing P/E
20.21
20.27
Forward P/E
17.56
Quality & Moat
6.91%
ROIC
3.38%
5.72%
ROE
16.39%
43.22%
Gross Margin
87.39%
0.75
PEG Ratio
2.66
Balance Sheet Safety
0.36
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
1.81
Net Debt / EBITDA
N/A
0.10%
Dividend Yield
1.81%
IR: 2Ties: 1MS: 6
IRMS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
IR

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 →
IR
$4.67
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$2.10B
Δ Market Cap
+$9.82B
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 →
IR
57.7% Overvalued
Price is 57.7% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $77.91
Fair Value: $49.41
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MS
25.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 25.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $223.17
Fair Value: $297.53
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
IR

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $78?

+15.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +14.5%

The market implies +15.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +14.5%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

MS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
IR
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.
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 →
IR
-2.55
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 →
IR
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 107.3%
No. of Institutional Holders1,278
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 24.3%Institutions 62.8%Retail & Other 12.9%
No. of Institutional Holders3,208
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 →
IR
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
MS
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $5,630
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 →
IR
1
Sells (3M)
14
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $59.54M
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$2.68M
@ $88.00 · 2026-04-13
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$11.11M
@ $94.11 · 2026-03-02
KINI VIKRAM
Chief Financial Officer
$2.74M
@ $96.50 · 2026-02-20
HUMPHREY JOHN R.
Director
$412,370
@ $95.90 · 2026-02-19
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$90,000
@ $100.00 · 2026-02-18
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$9.17M
@ $99.25 · 2026-02-17
SCHESKE MICHAEL J
Officer
$1.87M
@ $97.67 · 2026-02-17
KEENE KATHLEEN M
Officer
$1.19M
@ $99.46 · 2026-02-17
SCHIESL ANDREW R
General Counsel
$1.76M
@ $98.00 · 2026-02-17
HEPDING ELIZABETH MELOY
Officer
$1.77M
@ $97.11 · 2026-02-17
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$44,000
@ $100.00 · 2026-02-11
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$9.75M
@ $97.54 · 2026-02-04
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$16.83M
@ $88.12 · 2026-01-16
SCHESKE MICHAEL J
Officer
$119,086
@ $80.63 · 2025-12-01
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$3.21M
@ $83.03 · 2025-05-20
HEPDING ELIZABETH MELOY
Officer
$293,230
@ $83.78 · 2025-05-14
SCHIESL ANDREW R
General Counsel
$976,316
@ $84.90 · 2025-05-13
SCHIESL ANDREW R
General Counsel
$1.15M
@ $87.05 · 2025-02-18
SCHESKE MICHAEL J
Officer
$246,621
@ $97.44 · 2024-11-05
SCHIESL ANDREW R
General Counsel
$2.30M
@ $95.08 · 2024-11-05
KEENE KATHLEEN M
Officer
$420,673
@ $90.00 · 2024-08-28
HEPDING ELIZABETH MELOY
Officer
$685,650
@ $91.42 · 2024-08-21
REYNAL VICENTE
Chief Executive Officer
$4.63M
@ $92.51 · 2024-08-15
SCHIESL ANDREW R
General Counsel
$2.16M
@ $90.05 · 2024-08-09
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
MS
4
Sells (3M)
16
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $70.42M
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
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$1.44M
@ $183.45 · 2026-01-20
YESHAYA SHARON
Chief Financial Officer
$2.94M
@ $185.77 · 2026-01-20
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$1.55M
@ $182.08 · 2026-01-20
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$5.57M
@ $183.62 · 2026-01-20
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$3.97M
@ $184.00 · 2026-01-20
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$3.69M
@ $184.55 · 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
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$4.09M
@ $141.13 · 2025-07-17
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.69M
@ $141.12 · 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
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.20M
@ $136.43 · 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
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.78M
@ $136.20 · 2025-01-21
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.52M
@ $136.92 · 2025-01-21
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$368,375
@ $105.25 · 2024-07-26
AKRAM RAJA
Officer
$797,764
@ $106.37 · 2024-07-18
HERZ ROBERT H
Director
$106,621
@ $106.62 · 2024-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$4.26M
@ $106.54 · 2024-07-17
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 →
IR
FearGreed
😐Neutral(48/100)

"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
😏Greed(70/100)

"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"

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 →
IR
⚪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 (48)
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: Greed (70)
View IR Full AnalysisView MS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: IR vs MS

Is Ingersoll Rand Inc. or Morgan Stanley more undervalued in 2026?▼

Based on our discounted cash flow model, MS trades at a 25.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $298 vs. price $223), compared to IR's -57.7% margin of safety (intrinsic $49 vs. $78).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Ingersoll Rand Inc. or Morgan Stanley?▼

MS scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while IR scores 59/100 (Narrow 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. IR scores 3.4 (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, Ingersoll Rand Inc. or Morgan Stanley?▼

IR earns 6.9% ROIC versus MS's 3.4%. 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, Ingersoll Rand Inc.'s or Morgan Stanley's?▼

IR's dividend earns a safety score of 88/100 (Very Safe), compared to MS's 79/100 (Safe). IR has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.