Compare StocksLMT vs MRK

Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) vs Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, LMT is overvalued at $511, with a DCF intrinsic value of $381 and a margin of safety of -34%. MRK is undervalued at $114, with an intrinsic value of $597 and a margin of safety of 81%. Of the two, MRK has the wider margin of safety.

LMT
Lockheed Martin Corporation
$510.95
VS
MRK
Merck & Co., Inc.
$113.87

Rewards

LMT
  • Lockheed Martin Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Lockheed Martin Corporation scores 74/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Return on equity has consistently exceeded 20% over 4 years, indicating efficient use of shareholder capital.
MRK
  • Gross margin of 76.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $4.94 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
  • Management has timed buybacks well — 2 out of 3 years showed value-accretive repurchases.

Risks

LMT
  • Gross margin of 9.9% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • FCF yield of 5.9% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • High leverage (2.51x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
MRK
  • PEG ratio of 5.36 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • 14 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
  • Free cash flow has declined at a 5.6% CAGR over the past 4 years — a concerning trend.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
LMT
MRK
Valuation
$6.91B
Free Cash Flow
$14.05B
5.86%
FCF Yield
5.00%
24.77
Trailing P/E
32.08
15.92
Forward P/E
11.91
Quality & Moat
23.16%
ROIC
21.10%
67.64%
ROE
18.94%
9.91%
Gross Margin
76.73%
1.13
PEG Ratio
5.36
Balance Sheet Safety
2.51
Net Debt / Equity
0.95
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.35
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.47
2.54%
Dividend Yield
2.95%
LMT: 5Ties: 1MRK: 6
LMTMRK

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
LMT

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.

MRK

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 →
LMT
$-1.60
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$8.03B
Δ Market Cap
$-12.81B
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
MRK
$-1.72
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$12.28B
Δ Market Cap
$-21.09B
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 →
LMT
34.0% Overvalued
Price is 34.0% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $510.95
Fair Value: $381.34
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MRK
80.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 80.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $113.87
Fair Value: $596.86
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
LMT

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $511?

+11.8%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +7.5%

The market implies +11.8% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +7.5%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

MRK

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $114?

+4.9%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +9.7%

The market implies +4.9% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +9.7%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
LMT
74/100
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.
MRK
68/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with revenue predictability as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability 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 →
LMT
-2.23
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.
MRK
-2.31
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 →
LMT
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 76.0%Retail & Other 23.9%
No. of Institutional Holders3,414
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.
MRK
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 82.3%Retail & Other 17.6%
No. of Institutional Holders4,766
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 →
LMT
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
MRK
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
THULIN INGE G
Director
$250,000
@ $88.28 · 2025-02-06
BAKER DOUGLAS M JR
Director
$1.33M
@ $88.50 · 2025-02-05
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 →
LMT
0
Sells (3M)
4
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $10.29M
CAHILL TIMOTHY S
Officer
$3.00M
@ $649.47 · 2026-03-11
ULMER GREGORY M
Officer
$1.87M
@ $658.08 · 2026-02-27
HILL STEPHANIE C
Officer
$1.59M
@ $660.64 · 2026-02-24
ST JOHN FRANK A
Chief Operating Officer
$3.83M
@ $491.04 · 2025-10-23
HILL STEPHANIE C
Officer
$2.12M
@ $442.51 · 2025-02-26
LIGHTFOOT ROBERT M JR
Officer
$1.42M
@ $442.42 · 2025-02-26
PAUL HARRY EDWARD III
Officer
$312,923
@ $442.61 · 2025-02-26
HILL STEPHANIE C
Officer
$1.78M
@ $542.72 · 2024-08-01
CAHILL TIMOTHY S
Officer
$2.05M
@ $515.36 · 2024-07-24
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
MRK
0
Sells (3M)
14
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $42.04M
GUINDO CHIRFI
Officer
$1.21M
@ $121.46 · 2026-02-12
LI DEAN Y
Officer
$1.20M
@ $117.52 · 2026-02-10
ZACHARY JENNIFER L
General Counsel
$14.49M
@ $119.15 · 2026-02-09
GUINDO CHIRFI
Officer
$1.18M
@ $118.41 · 2026-02-09
OOSTHUIZEN JOHANNES JACOBUS
Officer
$1.83M
@ $121.87 · 2026-02-06
WILLIAMS DAVID MICHAEL
Chief Technology Officer
$609,525
@ $121.91 · 2026-02-06
DELUCA RICHARD ROBERT JR.
Officer
$4.56M
@ $120.92 · 2026-02-06
GUINDO CHIRFI
Officer
$2.44M
@ $121.88 · 2026-02-05
SMART DALTON E. III
Officer
$765,920
@ $119.67 · 2026-02-04
DAVIS ROBERT M
Chief Executive Officer
$5.60M
@ $118.04 · 2026-02-04
LI DEAN Y
Officer
$1.79M
@ $118.77 · 2026-02-04
LITCHFIELD CAROLINE
Chief Financial Officer
$5.02M
@ $119.61 · 2026-02-04
DOWNING CRISTAL N.
Officer
$616,395
@ $87.00 · 2025-11-10
WILLIAMS DAVID MICHAEL
Chief Technology Officer
$720,040
@ $83.59 · 2025-11-03
SMART DALTON E. III
Officer
$352,723
@ $82.76 · 2025-04-25
OOSTHUIZEN JOHANNES JACOBUS
Officer
$714,745
@ $84.09 · 2025-02-19
WILLIAMS DAVID MICHAEL
Chief Technology Officer
$512,057
@ $85.34 · 2025-02-13
DOWNING CRISTAL N.
Officer
$209,551
@ $88.76 · 2025-02-06
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 →
LMT
FearGreed
😐Neutral(44/100)

"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.
MRK
FearGreed
😐Neutral(53/100)

"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 →
LMT
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 (44)
MRK
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 (53)
View LMT Full AnalysisView MRK Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: LMT vs MRK

Is Lockheed Martin Corporation or Merck & Co., Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, MRK trades at a 80.9% margin of safety (intrinsic value $597 vs. price $114), compared to LMT's -34.0% margin of safety (intrinsic $381 vs. $511).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Lockheed Martin Corporation or Merck & Co., Inc.?

LMT scores 74/100 (Wide moat), while MRK scores 68/100 (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, Lockheed Martin Corporation or Merck & Co., Inc.?

Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) generates a 5.9% free cash flow yield, compared to Merck & Co., Inc.'s 5.0%. 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, Lockheed Martin Corporation or Merck & Co., Inc.?

LMT earns 23.2% ROIC versus MRK's 21.1%. 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, Lockheed Martin Corporation's or Merck & Co., Inc.'s?

LMT's dividend earns a safety score of 84/100 (Very Safe), compared to MRK's 79/100 (Safe). LMT has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.