Compare StocksKIM vs MA

Kimco Realty Corporation (KIM) vs Mastercard Incorporated (MA): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-21, KIM is overvalued at $24, with a DCF intrinsic value of $6 and a margin of safety of -330%. MA is fairly valued at $490, with an intrinsic value of $571 and a margin of safety of 14%. Of the two, MA has the wider margin of safety.

KIM
Kimco Realty Corporation
$24.38
VS
MA
Mastercard Incorporated
$489.79

Rewards

KIM
  • Gross margin of 69.0% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Management has timed buybacks well — 3 out of 4 years showed value-accretive repurchases.
  • Trailing P/E of 28.0x is 49% below the historical average of 55.1x — potentially undervalued relative to its own history.
MA
  • Mastercard Incorporated has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 100.0% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Mastercard Incorporated scores 99/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.

Risks

KIM
  • FCF yield of 6.8% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • PEG ratio of 3.37 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • Net debt/EBITDA of 6.2x indicates heavy leverage — it would take over 4 years of EBITDA to pay off net debt.
MA
  • High leverage (1.60x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
  • 10 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
KIM
MA
Valuation
$1.12B
Free Cash Flow
$16.15B
6.81%
FCF Yield
3.73%
28.02
Trailing P/E
28.33
28.15
Forward P/E
21.50
Quality & Moat
3.12%
ROIC
63.51%
5.86%
ROE
232.08%
68.96%
Gross Margin
100.00%
3.37
PEG Ratio
1.51
Balance Sheet Safety
0.77
Net Debt / Equity
1.60
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
6.21
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.50
4.27%
Dividend Yield
0.71%
KIM: 3Ties: 2MA: 7
KIMMA

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
KIM

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.

MA

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 →
KIM
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-408.1M
Δ Market Cap
+$564.4M
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
MA
$5.62
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$31.68B
Δ Market Cap
+$177.96B
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 →
KIM
330.0% Overvalued
Price is 330.0% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $24.38
Fair Value: $5.67
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MA
14.2% Margin of Safety
Price is 14.2% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $489.79
Fair Value: $571.14
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
KIM

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $24?

+17.8%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +9.0%

The market implies +17.8% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +9.0%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

MA

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $490?

+13.0%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +12.0%

The market implies +13.0% Owner Earnings growth, roughly in line with history — reasonably priced.

Standard FCF implies +12.0%, reflecting ongoing growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
KIM
58/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with margin stability as the key competitive advantage. Improving reinvestment efficiency 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.
MA
99/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency 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 →
KIM
-2.50
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.
MA
-2.53
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 →
KIM
Insiders 2.2%Institutions 101.1%
No. of Institutional Holders968
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.
MA
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 91.6%Retail & Other 8.3%
No. of Institutional Holders4,805
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 →
KIM
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
MA
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 →
KIM
0
Sells (3M)
2
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $699,121
LOURENSO FRANK
Director
$198,872
@ $23.14 · 2026-02-17
PREUSSE MARY HOGAN
Director
$500,249
@ $21.66 · 2025-09-29
LOURENSO FRANK
Director
$194,323
@ $22.30 · 2025-02-14
JAMIESON DAVID R.
Chief Operating Officer
$1.10M
@ $21.92 · 2024-08-02
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
MA
0
Sells (3M)
10
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $33.68M
LING HAI
Officer
$4.48M
@ $499.20 · 2026-02-24
SACHIN J. MEHRA
Chief Financial Officer
$10.20M
@ $591.00 · 2025-09-02
LING HAI
Officer
$2.69M
@ $600.00 · 2025-08-22
SACHIN J. MEHRA
Chief Financial Officer
$10.46M
@ $586.89 · 2025-08-19
SACHIN J. MEHRA
Chief Financial Officer
$3.83M
@ $566.46 · 2025-08-05
GENACHOWSKI JULIUS
Director
$178,049
@ $570.67 · 2025-07-07
KIRKPATRICK LINDA PISTECCHIA
Officer
$536,480
@ $560.00 · 2025-06-30
SESHADRI RAJEEV
Officer
$601,447
@ $546.77 · 2025-06-27
GENACHOWSKI JULIUS
Director
$173,910
@ $561.00 · 2025-06-24
KIRKPATRICK LINDA PISTECCHIA
Officer
$536,480
@ $560.00 · 2025-06-24
SESHADRI RAJEEV
Officer
$508,474
@ $535.80 · 2025-06-20
VOSBURG CRAIG
Officer
$5.02M
@ $532.97 · 2025-06-20
SESHADRI RAJEEV
Officer
$1.76M
@ $561.78 · 2025-06-16
KIRKPATRICK LINDA PISTECCHIA
Officer
$549,373
@ $572.86 · 2025-06-13
VOSBURG CRAIG
Officer
$5.55M
@ $588.18 · 2025-06-12
VOSBURG CRAIG
Officer
$8.22M
@ $585.05 · 2025-06-05
ARKELL SANDRA A
Officer
$218,223
@ $577.31 · 2025-05-15
ARKELL SANDRA A
Officer
$257,535
@ $572.30 · 2025-05-12
MIEBACH MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$8.68M
@ $550.16 · 2025-03-26
MCLAUGHLIN EDWARD GRUNDE
Officer
$3.81M
@ $534.68 · 2025-03-19
MIEBACH MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$9.78M
@ $553.76 · 2025-03-05
VOSBURG CRAIG
Officer
$6.12M
@ $556.14 · 2025-03-05
VOSBURG CRAIG
Officer
$6.19M
@ $562.72 · 2025-02-26
MCLAUGHLIN EDWARD GRUNDE
Officer
$6.18M
@ $564.99 · 2025-02-18
MIEBACH MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$10.17M
@ $564.95 · 2025-02-18
VOSBURG CRAIG
Officer
$7.97M
@ $565.00 · 2025-02-18
SACHIN J. MEHRA
Chief Financial Officer
$2.36M
@ $500.44 · 2024-11-01
MADABHUSHI VENKATA RAJAMANNAR
Officer
$2.30M
@ $491.03 · 2024-09-27
MADABHUSHI VENKATA RAJAMANNAR
Officer
$2.29M
@ $489.86 · 2024-09-20
ARKELL SANDRA A
Officer
$550,000
@ $500.00 · 2024-09-17
MADABHUSHI VENKATA RAJAMANNAR
Officer
$2.31M
@ $493.10 · 2024-09-13
ARKELL SANDRA A
Officer
$528,000
@ $480.00 · 2024-08-29
MASTERCARD FOUNDATION ASSET MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$42.19M
@ $468.80 · 2024-08-22
MASTERCARD FOUNDATION ASSET MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$42.03M
@ $467.02 · 2024-08-21
LING HAI
Officer
$1.36M
@ $470.00 · 2024-08-16
SACHIN J. MEHRA
Chief Financial Officer
$3.16M
@ $470.00 · 2024-08-16
SACHIN J. MEHRA
Chief Financial Officer
$6.11M
@ $455.00 · 2024-08-05
LING HAI
Officer
$1.35M
@ $465.46 · 2024-08-01
ARKELL SANDRA A
Officer
$512,006
@ $465.46 · 2024-08-01
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 →
KIM
FearGreed
😐Neutral(56/100)

"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.
MA
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 →
KIM
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 (56)
MA
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 KIM Full AnalysisView MA Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: KIM vs MA

Is Kimco Realty Corporation or Mastercard Incorporated more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, MA trades at a 14.2% margin of safety (intrinsic value $571 vs. price $490), compared to KIM's -330.0% margin of safety (intrinsic $6 vs. $24).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Kimco Realty Corporation or Mastercard Incorporated?

MA scores 99/100 (Wide moat), while KIM scores 58/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Kimco Realty Corporation in financial distress?

KIM's Altman Z-Score of 1.1 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. MA scores 10.6 (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 company has better free cash flow, Kimco Realty Corporation or Mastercard Incorporated?

Kimco Realty Corporation (KIM) generates a 6.8% free cash flow yield, compared to Mastercard Incorporated's 3.7%. 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, Kimco Realty Corporation or Mastercard Incorporated?

MA earns 63.5% ROIC versus KIM's 3.1%. 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, Kimco Realty Corporation's or Mastercard Incorporated's?

MA's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to KIM's 33/100 (Unsafe). MA has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.