Compare StocksMETA vs UHS

Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) vs Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, META is fairly valued at $577, with a DCF intrinsic value of $679 and a margin of safety of 15%. UHS is undervalued at $141, with an intrinsic value of $465 and a margin of safety of 70%. Of the two, UHS has the wider margin of safety.

META
Meta Platforms, Inc.
$577.22
VS
UHS
Universal Health Services, Inc.
$141.17

Rewards

META
  • Meta Platforms, Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 81.9% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Meta Platforms, Inc. scores 80/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.
UHS
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 46.5% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Share count has been reduced by 14% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.83 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

Risks

META
  • Buybacks have been poorly timed — 3 out of 4 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
  • Insiders have sold $6.7M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.
UHS
  • FCF yield of 7.6% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
META
UHS
Valuation
$46.11B
Free Cash Flow
$650.82M
3.15%
FCF Yield
7.62%
21.00
Trailing P/E
5.90
15.93
Forward P/E
5.57
Quality & Moat
20.87%
ROIC
12.33%
32.93%
ROE
21.37%
81.94%
Gross Margin
44.23%
0.87
PEG Ratio
1.02
Balance Sheet Safety
0.02
Net Debt / Equity
0.66
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
0.05
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.88
0.35%
Dividend Yield
0.54%
META: 7Ties: 1UHS: 4
METAUHS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
META

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.

UHS

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 →
META
$8.94
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$151.52B
Δ Market Cap
+$1.36T
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
UHS
$1.05
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Value Creator
Σ Retained
$3.19B
Δ Market Cap
+$3.36B
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 →
META
14.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 14.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $577.22
Fair Value: $678.61
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
UHS
69.6% Margin of Safety
Price is 69.6% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $141.17
Fair Value: $465.09
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
META

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $577?

+10.4%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +14.1%

The market implies +10.4% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +14.1%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

UHS

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $141?

-3.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +8.3%

The market implies -3.2% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +8.3%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
META
80/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by roic consistency. Reinvestment Efficiency 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.
UHS
66/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with revenue predictability 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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
META
-3.04
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.
UHS
-2.44
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 →
META
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 79.3%Retail & Other 20.6%
No. of Institutional Holders6,597
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.
UHS
Insiders 4.8%Institutions 101.4%
No. of Institutional Holders916
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 →
META
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
UHS
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 →
META
4
Sells (3M)
63
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $58.33M
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$317,162
@ $629.29 · 2026-06-01
MAHONEY CURTIS J
Officer
$1.27M
@ $609.92 · 2026-05-27
BOSWORTH ANDREW
Chief Technology Officer
$4.77M
@ $607.83 · 2026-05-18
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$386,860
@ $667.00 · 2026-04-15
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$366,572
@ $632.02 · 2026-03-16
BOSWORTH ANDREW
Chief Technology Officer
$5.11M
@ $631.24 · 2026-02-18
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$370,724
@ $639.18 · 2026-02-17
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$342,869
@ $663.19 · 2026-02-09
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$369,448
@ $714.60 · 2026-02-02
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$343,805
@ $665.00 · 2026-01-26
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$314,517
@ $608.35 · 2026-01-20
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$358,602
@ $618.28 · 2026-01-15
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$337,601
@ $653.00 · 2026-01-12
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$336,262
@ $650.41 · 2026-01-05
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$341,860
@ $658.69 · 2025-12-30
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$340,258
@ $658.14 · 2025-12-29
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$342,218
@ $659.38 · 2025-12-23
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$341,794
@ $661.11 · 2025-12-22
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$333,836
@ $643.23 · 2025-12-16
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$374,680
@ $646.00 · 2025-12-15
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$333,982
@ $646.00 · 2025-12-15
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$344,699
@ $664.16 · 2025-12-09
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$346,199
@ $669.63 · 2025-12-08
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$333,312
@ $642.22 · 2025-12-02
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$330,379
@ $639.03 · 2025-12-01
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$323,929
@ $624.14 · 2025-11-25
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$309,445
@ $598.54 · 2025-11-24
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$307,040
@ $591.60 · 2025-11-18
ANDERSON AARON
Officer
$429,502
@ $591.60 · 2025-11-18
BOSWORTH ANDREW
Chief Technology Officer
$6.94M
@ $593.31 · 2025-11-18
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$365,610
@ $609.35 · 2025-11-17
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$1.90M
@ $608.60 · 2025-11-17
BOSWORTH ANDREW
Chief Technology Officer
$3.09M
@ $609.46 · 2025-11-14
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$325,596
@ $631.00 · 2025-11-10
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$326,227
@ $631.00 · 2025-11-10
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$325,932
@ $628.00 · 2025-11-04
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$339,152
@ $656.00 · 2025-11-03
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$390,807
@ $753.00 · 2025-10-28
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$387,528
@ $749.57 · 2025-10-27
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$382,176
@ $736.37 · 2025-10-21
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$372,912
@ $721.30 · 2025-10-20
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$333,391
@ $716.97 · 2025-10-15
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$367,374
@ $707.85 · 2025-10-14
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$368,797
@ $713.34 · 2025-10-13
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$372,113
@ $716.98 · 2025-10-07
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$364,387
@ $704.81 · 2025-10-06
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$384,838
@ $741.50 · 2025-09-30
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$387,088
@ $748.72 · 2025-09-29
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$399,215
@ $769.20 · 2025-09-23
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$403,948
@ $781.33 · 2025-09-22
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$398,156
@ $767.16 · 2025-09-16
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$352,224
@ $757.47 · 2025-09-15
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$391,612
@ $757.47 · 2025-09-15
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$393,142
@ $757.50 · 2025-09-09
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$390,671
@ $755.65 · 2025-09-08
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$376,924
@ $726.25 · 2025-09-02
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$375,471
@ $726.25 · 2025-09-02
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$389,494
@ $750.47 · 2025-08-26
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$390,392
@ $755.11 · 2025-08-25
NEWSTEAD JENNIFER
Officer
$402,225
@ $775.00 · 2025-08-18
OLIVAN JAVIER
Chief Operating Officer
$2.44M
@ $780.95 · 2025-08-18
BOSWORTH ANDREW
Chief Technology Officer
$13.02M
@ $777.15 · 2025-08-18
KIMMITT ROBERT M
Director
$364,709
@ $784.32 · 2025-08-15
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
UHS
0
Sells (3M)
3
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $1.20M
SUSSMAN ELLIOT J
Director
$128,099
@ $190.06 · 2026-03-13
NIMETZ WARREN J.
Director
$852,343
@ $223.30 · 2025-11-11
SUSSMAN ELLIOT J
Director
$217,799
@ $225.70 · 2025-10-29
SINGER MARIA RUDERMAN
Director
$210,053
@ $191.48 · 2025-05-14
SINGER MARIA RUDERMAN
Director
$179,161
@ $179.16 · 2025-03-10
SINGER MARIA RUDERMAN
Director
$308,516
@ $191.15 · 2024-12-11
SUSSMAN ELLIOT J
Director
$375,534
@ $218.08 · 2024-08-13
NIMETZ WARREN J.
Director
$749,552
@ $217.64 · 2024-08-12
CHEN-LANGENMAYR NINA
Director
$180,294
@ $212.11 · 2024-08-07
SUSSMAN ELLIOT J
Director
$533,616
@ $210.00 · 2024-07-26
MCDONNELL EILEEN C.
Director
$531,211
@ $209.55 · 2024-07-26
PETERSON MATTHEW JAY
Officer
$3.19M
@ $210.85 · 2024-07-26
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 →
META
FearGreed
😨Fear(38/100)

"Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"

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.
UHS
FearGreed
😨Fear(31/100)

"Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"

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 →
META
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: Fear (38)
UHS
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: Fear (31)
View META Full AnalysisView UHS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: META vs UHS

Is Meta Platforms, Inc. or Universal Health Services, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, UHS trades at a 69.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $465 vs. price $141), compared to META's 14.9% margin of safety (intrinsic $679 vs. $577).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Meta Platforms, Inc. or Universal Health Services, Inc.?

META scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while UHS scores 66/100 (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, Meta Platforms, Inc. or Universal Health Services, Inc.?

Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) generates a 7.6% free cash flow yield, compared to Meta Platforms, Inc.'s 3.1%. 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, Meta Platforms, Inc. or Universal Health Services, Inc.?

META earns 20.9% ROIC versus UHS's 12.3%. 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, Meta Platforms, Inc.'s or Universal Health Services, Inc.'s?

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