Compare StocksMGM vs V

MGM Resorts International (MGM) vs Visa Inc. (V): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, MGM is overvalued at $47, with a DCF intrinsic value of $0 and a margin of safety of -100%. V is fairly valued at $327, with an intrinsic value of $304 and a margin of safety of -8%. Of the two, V has the wider margin of safety.

MGM
MGM Resorts International
$46.84
VS
V
Visa Inc.
$327.24

Rewards

MGM
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 13.8% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Share count has been reduced by 32% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
  • FCF yield of 12.2% is historically attractive — the business generates significant cash relative to its price.
V
  • Visa Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 97.8% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Visa Inc. scores 99/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.

Risks

MGM
  • Buybacks have been poorly timed — 3 out of 4 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
  • Trailing P/E of 64.2x is 202% above the historical average of 21.3x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • High leverage (8.76x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
V
  • Insiders have sold $14.2M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
MGM
V
Valuation
$1.46B
Free Cash Flow
$20.84B
12.19%
FCF Yield
3.35%
64.16
Trailing P/E
28.55
20.16
Forward P/E
22.02
Quality & Moat
2.74%
ROIC
38.39%
13.49%
ROE
60.35%
44.16%
Gross Margin
97.78%
1.28
PEG Ratio
1.46
Balance Sheet Safety
8.76
Net Debt / Equity
0.28
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
12.84
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.33
0.00%
Dividend Yield
0.80%
MGM: 3Ties: 1V: 8
MGMV

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
MGM

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.

V

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 →
MGM
$-1.57
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$2.09B
Δ Market Cap
$-3.28B
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
V
$5.50
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$44.47B
Δ Market Cap
+$244.54B
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 →
MGM
Insufficient Data
Enter initial FCF to calculate intrinsic value
Current Price: $46.84
Fair Value: $0.00
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
V
7.6% Overvalued
Price is 7.6% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $327.24
Fair Value: $304.21
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
MGM

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $47?

+40.0%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +12.4%

The market implies +40.0% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +12.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

V

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $327?

+13.9%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +13.4%

The market implies +13.9% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +13.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
MGM
36/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though reinvestment efficiency 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 5 years of fundamental data.
V
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 →
MGM
-2.72
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.
V
-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.

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 →
MGM
Insiders 27.4%Institutions 68.0%Retail & Other 4.6%
No. of Institutional Holders814
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.
V
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 91.7%Retail & Other 8.2%
No. of Institutional Holders5,856
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 →
MGM
1
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $77.11M
IAC INC.
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$37.22M
@ $37.22 · 2026-03-24
IAC INC.
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$39.88M
@ $36.30 · 2025-12-05
HALKYARD JONATHAN S
Chief Financial Officer
$321,700
@ $32.17 · 2025-03-06
SALEM PAUL J
Director
$4.99M
@ $33.80 · 2024-08-05
HALKYARD JONATHAN S
Chief Financial Officer
$340,000
@ $34.00 · 2024-08-05
HORNBUCKLE WILLIAM J IV
Chief Executive Officer
$1.99M
@ $33.73 · 2024-08-05
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
V
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 →
MGM
0
Sells (3M)
1
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $2.17M
MCMANUS JOHN M
Officer
$2.17M
@ $36.12 · 2025-09-15
MEINERT TODD
Officer
$227,041
@ $37.84 · 2025-02-19
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
V
2
Sells (3M)
17
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $53.88M
SUH CHRIS
Chief Financial Officer
$3.46M
@ $324.81 · 2026-05-12
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$10.70M
@ $340.14 · 2026-04-29
CARNEY LLOYD A
Director
$201,253
@ $309.62 · 2026-03-11
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.66M
@ $349.18 · 2026-01-02
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$699,315
@ $345.00 · 2025-12-11
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.57M
@ $340.07 · 2025-12-11
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$7.84M
@ $330.14 · 2025-12-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$2.50M
@ $331.45 · 2025-12-02
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$2.08M
@ $330.00 · 2025-11-21
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$707,917
@ $325.93 · 2025-11-21
CARNEY LLOYD A
Director
$302,832
@ $336.48 · 2025-11-04
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.58M
@ $341.00 · 2025-11-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.59M
@ $342.30 · 2025-10-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.65M
@ $348.57 · 2025-09-02
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$697,329
@ $344.02 · 2025-08-18
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.60M
@ $343.13 · 2025-08-14
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.05M
@ $353.82 · 2025-07-01
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$4.36M
@ $375.00 · 2025-06-11
TANEJA RAJAT
President
$18.44M
@ $368.87 · 2025-06-05
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$17.10M
@ $370.00 · 2025-06-05
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.13M
@ $362.77 · 2025-06-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$6.32M
@ $357.45 · 2025-05-12
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$5.26M
@ $355.04 · 2025-05-08
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$889,868
@ $345.58 · 2025-05-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.98M
@ $345.58 · 2025-05-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.02M
@ $350.44 · 2025-04-01
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$13.40M
@ $340.41 · 2025-03-19
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$12.88M
@ $327.20 · 2025-03-14
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.13M
@ $363.00 · 2025-03-03
ANDRESKI PETER M
Officer
$815,314
@ $349.62 · 2025-02-07
MAHON TULLIER KELLY
Officer
$11.80M
@ $349.77 · 2025-02-07
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$874,480
@ $340.00 · 2025-02-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.93M
@ $340.00 · 2025-02-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.74M
@ $317.78 · 2025-01-02
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$11.15M
@ $315.55 · 2024-12-13
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.73M
@ $316.90 · 2024-12-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$668,603
@ $307.97 · 2024-11-22
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$741,996
@ $288.49 · 2024-11-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.49M
@ $288.49 · 2024-11-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.39M
@ $276.97 · 2024-10-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.38M
@ $276.37 · 2024-09-03
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$707,300
@ $275.00 · 2024-08-29
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.37M
@ $275.00 · 2024-08-29
MAHON TULLIER KELLY
Officer
$10.12M
@ $267.64 · 2024-08-16
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 →
MGM
FearGreed
😐Neutral(50/100)

"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.
V
FearGreed
😐Neutral(57/100)

"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 →
MGM
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 (50)
V
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 (57)
View MGM Full AnalysisView V Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: MGM vs V

Is MGM Resorts International or Visa Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, V trades at a -7.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $304 vs. price $327), compared to MGM's -100.0% margin of safety (intrinsic $0 vs. $47).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, MGM Resorts International or Visa Inc.?

V scores 99/100 (Wide moat), while MGM scores 36/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is MGM Resorts International in financial distress?

MGM's Altman Z-Score of 0.8 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. V scores 8.1 (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, MGM Resorts International or Visa Inc.?

MGM Resorts International (MGM) generates a 12.2% free cash flow yield, compared to Visa Inc.'s 3.3%. 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, MGM Resorts International or Visa Inc.?

V earns 38.4% ROIC versus MGM's 2.7%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.