Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) vs Procter & Gamble Company (The) (PG): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?
As of 2026-08-03, LMT is overvalued at $583, with a DCF intrinsic value of $389 and a margin of safety of -50%. PG is undervalued at $144, with an intrinsic value of $220753045647 and a margin of safety of 100%. Of the two, PG has the wider margin of safety.
Rewards
- ★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.
- ★Procter & Gamble Company (The) has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
- ★Procter & Gamble Company (The) scores 94/100 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.
Risks
- ⚠Gross margin of 11.8% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
- ⚠High leverage (1.91x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
- ⚠PEG ratio of 5.57 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
- ⚠28 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
Key Valuation Metrics
Learn more →Historical Fundamentals
Learn more →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.
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 →> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
> $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 →Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth
Learn more →What growth rate is the market pricing in at $583?
The market implies +13.2% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.
Standard FCF implies a demanding +11.9%, reflecting heavy growth investment.
What growth rate is the market pricing in at $144?
Market below historical growth — potential opportunity.
Economic Moat Score
Learn more →Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. Margin Stability is the area most vulnerable to competitive pressure.
Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. Revenue Predictability is the standout factor.
Forensic Accounting
Learn more →M-Score Trend
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.
Ownership Breakdown
Learn more →High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
Insider Buying Activity
Learn more →Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.
Insider Selling Activity
Learn more →Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.
🎭 Mr. Market's Mood
Learn more →"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"
"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"
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 →The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.
Frequently Asked Questions: LMT vs PG
Is Lockheed Martin Corporation or Procter & Gamble Company (The) more undervalued in 2026?▼
Based on our discounted cash flow model, PG trades at a 100.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $220753045647 vs. price $144), compared to LMT's -49.8% margin of safety (intrinsic $389 vs. $583).
Which stock has a wider economic moat, Lockheed Martin Corporation or Procter & Gamble Company (The)?▼
PG scores 94/100 (Wide moat), while LMT scores 74/100 (Wide moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.
Is Procter & Gamble Company (The) in financial distress?▼
PG's Altman Z-Score of 2.6 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. LMT scores 3.3 (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, Lockheed Martin Corporation or Procter & Gamble Company (The)?▼
LMT earns 24.8% ROIC versus PG's 15.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.