Compare StocksMS vs PG

Morgan Stanley (MS) vs Procter & Gamble Company (The) (PG): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-08-03, MS is undervalued at $210, with a DCF intrinsic value of $269 and a margin of safety of 22%. PG is undervalued at $144, with an intrinsic value of $220753045647 and a margin of safety of 100%. Of the two, PG has the wider margin of safety.

MS
Morgan Stanley
$210.42
VS
PG
Procter & Gamble Company (The)
$144.49

Rewards

MS
  • Gross margin of 87.6% 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.
PG
  • Procter & Gamble Company (The) has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Procter & Gamble Company (The) scores 94/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Return on equity has consistently exceeded 20% over 4 years, indicating efficient use of shareholder capital.

Risks

MS
  • Altman Z-Score of 0.29 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
  • Insiders have sold $5.4M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.
PG
  • PEG ratio of 5.57 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • 28 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
MS
PG
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$12.84B
N/A
FCF Yield
N/A
17.01
Trailing P/E
21.83
15.45
Forward P/E
19.50
Quality & Moat
3.68%
ROIC
15.19%
14.08%
ROE
30.29%
87.64%
Gross Margin
50.68%
1.99
PEG Ratio
5.57
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
0.45
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
N/A
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.02
2.19%
Dividend Yield
3.01%
MS: 5Ties: 1PG: 3
MSPG

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
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.

PG

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 →
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
PG
$-0.00
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$17.32B
Δ Market Cap
$-8.25
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 →
MS
21.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 21.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $210.42
Fair Value: $269.50
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
PG
100.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 100.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $144.49
Fair Value: $220753045647.21
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
MS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

PG

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $144?

-29.9%
Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

Market below historical growth — potential opportunity.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
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.
PG
94/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. Revenue Predictability 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 5 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
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.
PG
-2.54
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 →
MS
Insiders 24.4%Institutions 63.1%Retail & Other 12.5%
No. of Institutional Holders3,329
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.
PG
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 71.8%Retail & Other 28.2%
No. of Institutional Holders4,993
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 →
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
PG
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 →
MS
2
Sells (3M)
14
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $64.71M
SCHAPIRO MARY L
Director
$212,055
@ $212.06 · 2026-07-28
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$5.21M
@ $215.55 · 2026-07-17
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$2.12M
@ $190.75 · 2026-04-20
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$2.78M
@ $189.24 · 2026-04-17
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$9.74M
@ $188.59 · 2026-04-16
CRAWLEY MANDELL L.
Officer
$3.04M
@ $188.22 · 2026-04-16
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$6.02M
@ $182.61 · 2026-01-30
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$3.69M
@ $184.55 · 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
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
PICK EDWARD N.
Chief Executive Officer
$16.43M
@ $164.34 · 2025-10-31
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.53M
@ $140.62 · 2025-07-17
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.69M
@ $141.12 · 2025-07-17
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$2.81M
@ $140.30 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$4.09M
@ $141.13 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$3.70M
@ $127.37 · 2025-05-12
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.80M
@ $120.00 · 2025-05-02
HERZ ROBERT H
Director
$95,459
@ $119.32 · 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
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.52M
@ $136.92 · 2025-01-21
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.20M
@ $136.43 · 2025-01-21
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.78M
@ $136.20 · 2025-01-21
AKRAM RAJA
Chief Financial Officer
$2.38M
@ $136.01 · 2025-01-21
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$5.00M
@ $136.61 · 2025-01-21
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
PG
0
Sells (3M)
28
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $78.99M
FRANCISCO MA. FATIMA
Officer
$917,199
@ $165.29 · 2026-02-27
WHALEY SUSAN STREET
Officer
$288,454
@ $159.45 · 2026-02-19
AGUILAR MOSES VICTOR JAVIER
Officer
$2.46M
@ $162.28 · 2026-02-13
COOMBE GARY A
Officer
$5.86M
@ $162.33 · 2026-02-12
MOELLER JON R
Officer and Director
$28.12M
@ $162.29 · 2026-02-12
PURUSHOTHAMAN BALAJI
Officer
$2.06M
@ $160.31 · 2026-02-11
FRANCISCO MA. FATIMA
Officer
$1.26M
@ $158.00 · 2026-02-04
PRITCHARD MARC S
Officer
$14.50M
@ $151.15 · 2026-01-23
JANZARUK MATTHEW W.
Officer
$108,438
@ $149.57 · 2025-10-30
COOMBE GARY A
Officer
$538,139
@ $152.23 · 2025-10-02
MOELLER JON R
Chief Executive Officer
$1.78M
@ $152.23 · 2025-10-02
DAVIS JENNIFER L
Officer
$491,252
@ $152.23 · 2025-10-02
PURUSHOTHAMAN BALAJI
Officer
$74,594
@ $152.23 · 2025-10-02
WHALEY SUSAN STREET
Officer
$366,574
@ $152.23 · 2025-10-02
JEJURIKAR SHAILESH
Chief Operating Officer
$606,796
@ $152.23 · 2025-10-02
SCHULTEN ANDRE
Chief Financial Officer
$647,289
@ $152.23 · 2025-10-02
WHALEY SUSAN STREET
Officer
$156,835
@ $156.84 · 2025-08-29
COOMBE GARY A
Officer
$1.61M
@ $158.16 · 2025-08-21
RAMAN SUNDAR G.
Officer
$1.51M
@ $158.16 · 2025-08-21
MOELLER JON R
Chief Executive Officer
$6.31M
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
PRITCHARD MARC S
Officer
$1.55M
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
JANZARUK MATTHEW W.
Officer
$50,170
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
DAVIS JENNIFER L
Officer
$1.35M
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
PURUSHOTHAMAN BALAJI
Officer
$95,308
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
WHALEY SUSAN STREET
Officer
$969,908
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
JEJURIKAR SHAILESH
Chief Operating Officer
$2.05M
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
FRANCISCO MA. FATIMA
Officer
$1.43M
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
SCHULTEN ANDRE
Chief Financial Officer
$1.83M
@ $157.27 · 2025-08-19
AGUILAR MOSES VICTOR JAVIER
Officer
$1.67M
@ $158.67 · 2025-05-05
DAVIS JENNIFER L
Officer
$161,384
@ $161.38 · 2025-04-29
COOMBE GARY A
Officer
$6.08M
@ $173.68 · 2025-02-28
COOMBE GARY A
Officer
$3.09M
@ $171.66 · 2025-02-25
PRITCHARD MARC S
Officer
$14.82M
@ $163.84 · 2025-01-23
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 →
MS
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.
PG
FearGreed
😐Neutral(48/100)

"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 →
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: Neutral (57)
PG
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 (48)
View MS Full AnalysisView PG Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: MS vs PG

Is Morgan Stanley or Procter & Gamble Company (The) more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, PG trades at a 100.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $220753045647 vs. price $144), compared to MS's 21.9% margin of safety (intrinsic $269 vs. $210).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Morgan Stanley or Procter & Gamble Company (The)?

PG scores 94/100 (Wide moat), while MS scores 80/100 (Wide 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. PG scores 2.6 (Grey 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, Morgan Stanley or Procter & Gamble Company (The)?

PG earns 15.2% ROIC versus MS's 3.7%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.