Compare StocksMMM vs MS

3M Company (MMM) vs Morgan Stanley (MS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, MMM is fairly valued at $161, with a DCF intrinsic value of $147 and a margin of safety of -9%. MS is undervalued at $223, with an intrinsic value of $298 and a margin of safety of 25%. Of the two, MS has the wider margin of safety.

MMM
3M Company
$160.60
VS
MS
Morgan Stanley
$223.17

Rewards

MMM
  • Altman Z-Score of 4.26 indicates very low bankruptcy risk — the company is firmly in the safe zone.
MS
  • Gross margin of 87.4% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Morgan Stanley scores 80/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $3.56 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

Risks

MMM
  • FCF yield of 2.8% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • Trailing P/E of 30.9x is 74% above the historical average of 17.8x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • High leverage (2.21x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.
MS
  • Trailing P/E of 20.2x is 26% above the historical average of 16.1x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • PEG ratio of 2.66 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • Altman Z-Score of 0.29 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
MMM
MS
Valuation
$2.32B
Free Cash Flow
N/A
2.77%
FCF Yield
N/A
30.94
Trailing P/E
20.21
16.97
Forward P/E
17.56
Quality & Moat
28.04%
ROIC
3.38%
71.46%
ROE
16.39%
39.71%
Gross Margin
87.39%
1.71
PEG Ratio
2.66
Balance Sheet Safety
2.21
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
1.17
Net Debt / EBITDA
N/A
1.87%
Dividend Yield
1.81%
MMM: 3Ties: 3MS: 3
MMMMS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
MMM

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.

MS

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 →
MMM
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-6.43B
Δ Market Cap
+$29.83B
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
MS
$6.65
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$20.84B
Δ Market Cap
+$138.59B
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 →
MMM
9.5% Overvalued
Price is 9.5% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $160.60
Fair Value: $146.72
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
MS
25.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 25.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $223.17
Fair Value: $297.53
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
MMM

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $161?

+10.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +16.9%

The market implies +10.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +16.9%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

MS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
MMM
45/100
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.
MS
80/100
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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
MMM
-2.28
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone
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.
MS
-2.09
Possible 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 →
MMM
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 77.5%Retail & Other 22.4%
No. of Institutional Holders2,759
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.
MS
Insiders 24.3%Institutions 62.8%Retail & Other 12.9%
No. of Institutional Holders3,208
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 →
MMM
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
GORALSKI CHRISTIAN T JR
Officer
$1,822
@ $107.18 · 2024-10-23
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
MS
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $5,630
PETERSON DOUGLAS L
Director
$5,630
@ $156.39 · 2025-10-17
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 →
MMM
0
Sells (3M)
9
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $18.13M
REINSETH THERESA E
Officer
$888,796
@ $172.75 · 2026-02-11
DICKSON ZOE L
Officer
$4.27M
@ $170.34 · 2026-02-09
DICKSON ZOE L
Officer
$3.49M
@ $169.97 · 2026-02-09
CHAVEZ RODRIGUEZ BEATRIZ KARINA
Officer
$203,645
@ $171.13 · 2026-02-09
DICKSON ZOE L
Officer
$2.35M
@ $169.78 · 2025-11-13
DICKSON ZOE L
Officer
$2.31M
@ $169.82 · 2025-11-13
MURPHY MARK W
Chief Technology Officer
$3.17M
@ $166.55 · 2025-10-29
GORALSKI CHRISTIAN T JR
President
$925,860
@ $150.18 · 2025-08-07
REINSETH THERESA E
Officer
$523,741
@ $150.63 · 2025-08-05
BANOVETZ JOHN PATRICK
Officer
$1.15M
@ $148.37 · 2025-05-23
RHODES KEVIN H
Officer
$1.23M
@ $154.02 · 2025-05-20
DICKSON ZOE L
Officer
$1.18M
@ $149.02 · 2025-05-15
CLARKE VICTORIA
Officer
$269,878
@ $154.22 · 2025-01-31
ROMAN MICHAEL F
Chairman of the Board
$7.55M
@ $152.30 · 2025-01-29
BANOVETZ JOHN PATRICK
Officer
$726,249
@ $151.36 · 2025-01-27
DICKSON ZOE L
Officer
$542,957
@ $149.41 · 2025-01-27
CHAVEZ RODRIGUEZ BEATRIZ KARINA
President
$247,163
@ $150.25 · 2025-01-27
RHODES KEVIN H
Officer
$1.01M
@ $149.85 · 2025-01-27
REINSETH THERESA E
Officer
$346,241
@ $149.95 · 2025-01-24
ROMAN MICHAEL F
Chairman of the Board
$6.79M
@ $150.01 · 2025-01-24
GORALSKI CHRISTIAN T JR
Officer
$944,070
@ $149.43 · 2025-01-24
REINSETH THERESA E
Officer
$131,925
@ $127.71 · 2024-11-20
ROMAN MICHAEL F
Chairman of the Board
$700,608
@ $123.46 · 2024-08-07
REINSETH THERESA E
Chief Financial Officer
$260,652
@ $124.12 · 2024-08-06
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
MS
4
Sells (3M)
16
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $70.42M
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$2.12M
@ $190.75 · 2026-04-20
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$2.78M
@ $189.24 · 2026-04-17
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$3.04M
@ $188.22 · 2026-04-16
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$9.74M
@ $188.59 · 2026-04-16
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$6.02M
@ $182.61 · 2026-01-30
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$1.44M
@ $183.45 · 2026-01-20
YESHAYA SHARON
Chief Financial Officer
$2.94M
@ $185.77 · 2026-01-20
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$1.55M
@ $182.08 · 2026-01-20
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$5.57M
@ $183.62 · 2026-01-20
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$3.97M
@ $184.00 · 2026-01-20
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$3.69M
@ $184.55 · 2026-01-20
PICK EDWARD N.
Chief Executive Officer
$16.43M
@ $164.34 · 2025-10-31
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$2.81M
@ $140.30 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$4.09M
@ $141.13 · 2025-07-17
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.69M
@ $141.12 · 2025-07-17
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.53M
@ $140.62 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$3.70M
@ $127.37 · 2025-05-12
HERZ ROBERT H
Director
$95,459
@ $119.32 · 2025-05-02
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.80M
@ $120.00 · 2025-05-02
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.12M
@ $111.65 · 2025-04-15
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$1.15M
@ $138.06 · 2025-01-22
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.20M
@ $136.43 · 2025-01-21
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$5.00M
@ $136.61 · 2025-01-21
AKRAM RAJA
Chief Financial Officer
$2.38M
@ $136.01 · 2025-01-21
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.78M
@ $136.20 · 2025-01-21
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.52M
@ $136.92 · 2025-01-21
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$368,375
@ $105.25 · 2024-07-26
AKRAM RAJA
Officer
$797,764
@ $106.37 · 2024-07-18
HERZ ROBERT H
Director
$106,621
@ $106.62 · 2024-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$4.26M
@ $106.54 · 2024-07-17
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 →
MMM
FearGreed
😏Greed(62/100)

"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.
MS
FearGreed
😏Greed(70/100)

"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.

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 →
MMM
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 (62)
MS
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 (70)
View MMM Full AnalysisView MS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: MMM vs MS

Is 3M Company or Morgan Stanley more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, MS trades at a 25.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $298 vs. price $223), compared to MMM's -9.5% margin of safety (intrinsic $147 vs. $161).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, 3M Company or Morgan Stanley?

MS scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while MMM scores 45/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Morgan Stanley in financial distress?

MS's Altman Z-Score of 0.3 places it in the Distress zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. MMM scores 4.3 (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, 3M Company or Morgan Stanley?

MMM earns 28.0% ROIC versus MS's 3.4%. 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, 3M Company's or Morgan Stanley's?

MS's dividend earns a safety score of 79/100 (Safe), compared to MMM's 55/100 (Borderline). MS has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

MMM vs MS: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io