Compare StocksLRCX vs TSLA

Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) vs Tesla, Inc. (TSLA): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, LRCX is overvalued at $389, with a DCF intrinsic value of $278 and a margin of safety of -40%. TSLA is overvalued at $400, with an intrinsic value of $131 and a margin of safety of -206%. Of the two, LRCX has the wider margin of safety.

LRCX
Lam Research Corporation
$389.04
VS
TSLA
Tesla, Inc.
$400.49

Rewards

LRCX
  • Lam Research Corporation has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Lam Research Corporation scores 81/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with margin stability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 28.5% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
TSLA
  • Altman Z-Score of 19.94 indicates very low bankruptcy risk — the company is firmly in the safe zone.
  • Net debt/EBITDA of -2.6x means the company holds more cash than debt — a net cash position.

Risks

LRCX
  • Buybacks have been poorly timed — 3 out of 4 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
  • FCF yield of 0.9% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • Trailing P/E of 73.7x is 189% above the historical average of 25.5x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
TSLA
  • ROIC has declined by 21.5 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • Gross margin of 19.1% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • Share count has increased by 19% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
LRCX
TSLA
Valuation
$4.35B
Free Cash Flow
$5.25B
0.89%
FCF Yield
0.35%
73.68
Trailing P/E
367.42
48.78
Forward P/E
160.20
Quality & Moat
41.92%
ROIC
3.23%
66.76%
ROE
4.90%
49.98%
Gross Margin
19.06%
2.14
PEG Ratio
5.78
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.13
Net Debt / EBITDA
-2.60
0.28%
Dividend Yield
0.00%
LRCX: 8Ties: 1TSLA: 3
LRCXTSLA

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
LRCX

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.

TSLA

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 →
LRCX
$15.03
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$10.62B
Δ Market Cap
+$159.61B
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
TSLA
$50.04
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$25.92B
Δ Market Cap
+$1.30T
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 →
LRCX
19.2% Overvalued
Price is 19.2% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $389.04
Fair Value: $326.25
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
TSLA
626.9% Overvalued
Price is 626.9% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $400.49
Fair Value: $55.09
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
LRCX

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $389?

+28.5%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +31.5%

The market implies +28.5% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +31.5%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

TSLA

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $400?

+50.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +45.1%

The market implies +50.2% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +45.1%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
LRCX
81/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by margin stability. Revenue Predictability 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.
TSLA
31/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability 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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
LRCX
-2.28
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.
TSLA
-2.86
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 →
LRCX
Insiders 0.3%Institutions 88.1%Retail & Other 11.6%
No. of Institutional Holders3,504
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.
TSLA
Insiders 11.1%Institutions 44.9%Retail & Other 44.0%
No. of Institutional Holders5,237
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 →
LRCX
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
HARTER AVA
Officer
$602.00
@ $66.89 · 2025-04-08
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
TSLA
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $999.96M
MUSK ELON REEVE
Chief Executive Officer
$999.96M
@ $389.28 · 2025-09-12
GEBBIA JOSEPH
Director
$1.03M
@ $256.31 · 2025-04-24
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 →
LRCX
5
Sells (3M)
16
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $119.03M
BRANDT ERIC K
Director
$20.01M
@ $367.18 · 2026-06-12
BRANDT ERIC K
Director
$19.12M
@ $350.80 · 2026-06-11
FERNANDES NEIL J
Officer
$2.37M
@ $309.60 · 2026-06-01
FERNANDES NEIL J
Officer
$4.64M
@ $255.14 · 2026-05-01
HARTER AVA
Officer
$1.55M
@ $258.66 · 2026-04-27
HARTER AVA
Officer
$333,990
@ $222.66 · 2026-03-04
BETTINGER DOUGLAS R
Chief Financial Officer
$11.21M
@ $224.03 · 2026-03-04
HARTER AVA
Officer
$930,000
@ $232.50 · 2026-03-02
BETTINGER DOUGLAS R
Chief Financial Officer
$9.28M
@ $230.22 · 2026-03-02
BRANDT ERIC K
Director
$7.90M
@ $225.60 · 2026-02-06
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$26.76M
@ $163.86 · 2025-12-17
BETTINGER DOUGLAS R
Chief Financial Officer
$6.04M
@ $150.60 · 2025-11-14
MAYER BETHANY J
Director
$4,786
@ $159.53 · 2025-11-07
MAYER BETHANY J
Director
$207,667
@ $159.99 · 2025-11-03
HARTER AVA
Officer
$1.42M
@ $157.47 · 2025-10-27
VAHEDI VAHID
Officer
$7.25M
@ $138.90 · 2025-10-13
VARADARAJAN SESHASAYEE
Officer
$9.91M
@ $90.00 · 2025-02-20
MAYER BETHANY J
Director
$124,757
@ $75.15 · 2024-11-01
CORREIA CHRISTINA
Officer
$528,929
@ $817.51 · 2024-10-01
FERNANDES NEIL J
Officer
$1.71M
@ $1056.99 · 2024-07-12
CORREIA CHRISTINA
Officer
$687,282
@ $1062.26 · 2024-07-01
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$14.67M
@ $1067.12 · 2024-06-28
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$6.04M
@ $1078.53 · 2024-06-28
ARCHER TIMOTHY M
Chief Executive Officer
$10.33M
@ $1070.39 · 2024-06-28
FERNANDES NEIL J
Officer
$4.65M
@ $1055.76 · 2024-06-27
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
TSLA
4
Sells (3M)
10
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $62.72M
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.05M
@ $402.27 · 2026-06-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.35M
@ $450.00 · 2026-05-13
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$9.99M
@ $378.11 · 2026-04-30
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$9.27M
@ $359.33 · 2026-03-30
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$899,077
@ $397.12 · 2026-03-06
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$10.69M
@ $415.56 · 2026-02-25
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$25.61M
@ $450.66 · 2025-12-09
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.17M
@ $443.93 · 2025-12-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$918,137
@ $352.45 · 2025-09-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.77M
@ $295.26 · 2025-07-08
ZHU XIAOTONG
Officer
$4.86M
@ $323.81 · 2025-06-12
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$732,573
@ $285.71 · 2025-06-09
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.40M
@ $342.30 · 2025-06-03
EHRENPREIS IRA MATTHEW
Director
$170.64M
@ $357.30 · 2025-05-27
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$32.73M
@ $357.39 · 2025-05-27
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.05M
@ $350.11 · 2025-05-16
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.20M
@ $300.00 · 2025-05-09
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$30.81M
@ $274.12 · 2025-05-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.14M
@ $284.40 · 2025-05-01
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$32.10M
@ $285.58 · 2025-04-29
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.00M
@ $250.00 · 2025-04-07
MURDOCH JAMES RUPERT
Director
$13.19M
@ $240.79 · 2025-03-10
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$718,111
@ $268.75 · 2025-03-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$33.67M
@ $299.61 · 2025-03-03
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.78M
@ $296.02 · 2025-03-03
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$27.59M
@ $367.87 · 2025-02-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$43.16M
@ $384.04 · 2025-02-03
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.68M
@ $383.11 · 2025-02-03
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$41.16M
@ $411.63 · 2025-01-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.89M
@ $413.56 · 2025-01-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$975,015
@ $374.29 · 2024-12-06
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$35.25M
@ $352.54 · 2024-12-04
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$39.79M
@ $354.06 · 2024-12-02
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.48M
@ $354.43 · 2024-12-02
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$35.34M
@ $314.44 · 2024-11-15
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$34.60M
@ $346.02 · 2024-11-11
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$3.80M
@ $316.91 · 2024-11-11
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$15.14M
@ $250.23 · 2024-11-01
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.01M
@ $251.76 · 2024-11-01
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.00M
@ $250.00 · 2024-10-24
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.00M
@ $250.00 · 2024-09-23
ZHU XIAOTONG
Officer
$65,867
@ $221.77 · 2024-09-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$14.60M
@ $219.96 · 2024-07-25
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 →
LRCX
FearGreed
😏Greed(65/100)

"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.
TSLA
FearGreed
😐Neutral(45/100)

"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 →
LRCX
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 (65)
TSLA
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 (45)
View LRCX Full AnalysisView TSLA Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: LRCX vs TSLA

Is Lam Research Corporation or Tesla, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, LRCX trades at a -40.1% margin of safety (intrinsic value $278 vs. price $389), compared to TSLA's -206.1% margin of safety (intrinsic $131 vs. $400).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Lam Research Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

LRCX scores 81/100 (Wide moat), while TSLA scores 31/100 (None 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, Lam Research Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) generates a 0.9% free cash flow yield, compared to Tesla, Inc.'s 0.3%. 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, Lam Research Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

LRCX earns 41.9% ROIC versus TSLA's 3.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.