Compare StocksMRK vs XOM

Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) vs Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, MRK is undervalued at $114, with a DCF intrinsic value of $597 and a margin of safety of 81%. XOM is overvalued at $138, with an intrinsic value of $109 and a margin of safety of -26%. Of the two, MRK has the wider margin of safety.

MRK
Merck & Co., Inc.
$113.87
VS
XOM
Exxon Mobil Corporation
$137.81

Rewards

MRK
  • Gross margin of 76.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $4.94 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
  • Management has timed buybacks well — 2 out of 3 years showed value-accretive repurchases.
XOM
  • Altman Z-Score of 4.16 indicates very low bankruptcy risk — the company is firmly in the safe zone.

Risks

MRK
  • PEG ratio of 5.36 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • 14 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
  • Free cash flow has declined at a 5.6% CAGR over the past 4 years — a concerning trend.
XOM
  • ROIC has declined by 12.0 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • Buybacks have been poorly timed — 3 out of 4 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
  • Trailing P/E of 23.2x is 81% above the historical average of 12.8x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
MRK
XOM
Valuation
$14.05B
Free Cash Flow
$23.61B
5.00%
FCF Yield
4.13%
32.08
Trailing P/E
23.20
11.91
Forward P/E
12.93
Quality & Moat
21.10%
ROIC
5.30%
18.94%
ROE
9.87%
76.73%
Gross Margin
29.77%
5.36
PEG Ratio
1.18
Balance Sheet Safety
0.95
Net Debt / Equity
0.15
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
1.47
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.70
2.95%
Dividend Yield
2.90%
MRK: 5Ties: 2XOM: 5
MRKXOM

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
MRK

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.

XOM

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 →
MRK
$-1.72
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$12.28B
Δ Market Cap
$-21.09B
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
XOM
$1.06
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Value Creator
Σ Retained
$49.66B
Δ Market Cap
+$52.66B
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 →
MRK
80.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 80.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $113.87
Fair Value: $596.86
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
XOM
26.4% Overvalued
Price is 26.4% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $137.81
Fair Value: $109.03
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
MRK

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $114?

+4.9%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +9.7%

The market implies +4.9% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +9.7%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

XOM

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $138?

+11.2%
Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

Market pricing in significantly higher growth than history — aggressive.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
MRK
68/100
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.
XOM
48/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency 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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
MRK
-2.31
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.
XOM
-2.74
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 →
MRK
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 82.3%Retail & Other 17.6%
No. of Institutional Holders4,766
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.
XOM

No ownership data available.

High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

Insider Buying Activity

Learn more →
MRK
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
THULIN INGE G
Director
$250,000
@ $88.28 · 2025-02-06
BAKER DOUGLAS M JR
Director
$1.33M
@ $88.50 · 2025-02-05
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
XOM
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 →
MRK
0
Sells (3M)
14
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $42.04M
GUINDO CHIRFI
Officer
$1.21M
@ $121.46 · 2026-02-12
LI DEAN Y
Officer
$1.20M
@ $117.52 · 2026-02-10
ZACHARY JENNIFER L
General Counsel
$14.49M
@ $119.15 · 2026-02-09
GUINDO CHIRFI
Officer
$1.18M
@ $118.41 · 2026-02-09
OOSTHUIZEN JOHANNES JACOBUS
Officer
$1.83M
@ $121.87 · 2026-02-06
WILLIAMS DAVID MICHAEL
Chief Technology Officer
$609,525
@ $121.91 · 2026-02-06
DELUCA RICHARD ROBERT JR.
Officer
$4.56M
@ $120.92 · 2026-02-06
GUINDO CHIRFI
Officer
$2.44M
@ $121.88 · 2026-02-05
SMART DALTON E. III
Officer
$765,920
@ $119.67 · 2026-02-04
DAVIS ROBERT M
Chief Executive Officer
$5.60M
@ $118.04 · 2026-02-04
LI DEAN Y
Officer
$1.79M
@ $118.77 · 2026-02-04
LITCHFIELD CAROLINE
Chief Financial Officer
$5.02M
@ $119.61 · 2026-02-04
DOWNING CRISTAL N.
Officer
$616,395
@ $87.00 · 2025-11-10
WILLIAMS DAVID MICHAEL
Chief Technology Officer
$720,040
@ $83.59 · 2025-11-03
SMART DALTON E. III
Officer
$352,723
@ $82.76 · 2025-04-25
OOSTHUIZEN JOHANNES JACOBUS
Officer
$714,745
@ $84.09 · 2025-02-19
WILLIAMS DAVID MICHAEL
Chief Technology Officer
$512,057
@ $85.34 · 2025-02-13
DOWNING CRISTAL N.
Officer
$209,551
@ $88.76 · 2025-02-06
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
XOM
0
Sells (3M)
0
Sells (12M)
No open market insider sales found.
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 →
MRK
FearGreed
😐Neutral(53/100)

"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.
XOM
No sentiment data available for this stock.

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 →
MRK
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 (53)
XOM
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)
View MRK Full AnalysisView XOM Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: MRK vs XOM

Is Merck & Co., Inc. or Exxon Mobil Corporation more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, MRK trades at a 80.9% margin of safety (intrinsic value $597 vs. price $114), compared to XOM's -26.4% margin of safety (intrinsic $109 vs. $138).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Merck & Co., Inc. or Exxon Mobil Corporation?

MRK scores 68/100 (Narrow moat), while XOM scores 48/100 (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, Merck & Co., Inc. or Exxon Mobil Corporation?

Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) generates a 5.0% free cash flow yield, compared to Exxon Mobil Corporation's 4.1%. 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, Merck & Co., Inc. or Exxon Mobil Corporation?

MRK earns 21.1% ROIC versus XOM's 5.3%. 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, Merck & Co., Inc.'s or Exxon Mobil Corporation's?

MRK's dividend earns a safety score of 79/100 (Safe), compared to XOM's 69/100 (Safe). MRK has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.