Compare Stocks › MS vs SO

Morgan Stanley (MS) vs The Southern Company (SO): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-11-01, MS is undervalued at $184, with a DCF intrinsic value of $314 and a margin of safety of 41%. SO is overvalued at $94, with an intrinsic value of $14 and a margin of safety of -584%. Of the two, MS has the wider margin of safety.

MS
Morgan Stanley
$184.30
VS
SO
The Southern Company
$93.71

Rewards

MS
  • ★Gross margin of 87.3% 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.
SO
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.41 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

Risks

MS
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.29 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
  • ⚠13 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
SO
  • ⚠The Southern Company scores only 26/100 on the Economic Moat Score, suggesting limited durable competitive advantages.
  • ⚠PEG ratio of 2.21 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • ⚠High leverage (1.75x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
MS
SO
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$-3.91B
N/A
FCF Yield
-3.63%
14.62
Trailing P/E
22.58
13.50
Forward P/E
19.05
Quality & Moat
3.47%
ROIC
5.91%
13.84%
ROE
11.48%
87.31%
Gross Margin
48.29%
1.61
PEG Ratio
2.21
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
1.75
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
N/A
Net Debt / EBITDA
5.20
2.50%
Dividend Yield
3.24%
MS: 6Ties: 1SO: 2
MSSO

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.

SO

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
SO
$5.15
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$3.71B
Δ Market Cap
+$19.12B
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
41.3% Margin of Safety
Price is 41.3% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $184.30
Fair Value: $313.71
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
SO
583.8% Overvalued
Price is 583.8% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $93.71
Fair Value: $13.70
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
MS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

SO

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

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.
SO
26/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though margin stability 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.

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.
SO
-2.65
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 63.5%Retail & Other 12.1%
No. of Institutional Holders3,458
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.
SO
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 74.3%Retail & Other 25.6%
No. of Institutional Holders2,798
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)
0
Buys (12M)
PETERSON DOUGLAS L
Director
$5,630
@ $156.39 · 2025-10-17
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
SO
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
0
Sells (3M)
13
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $48.28M
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
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
YESHAYA SHARON
Chief Financial Officer
$2.94M
@ $185.77 · 2026-01-20
SMITH CHARLES AUBREY III
Officer
$1.55M
@ $182.08 · 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
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$3.69M
@ $184.55 · 2026-01-20
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$5.57M
@ $183.62 · 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
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.69M
@ $141.12 · 2025-07-17
SIMKOWITZ DANIEL A
President
$4.09M
@ $141.13 · 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
GROSSMAN ERIC F
Officer
$1.78M
@ $136.20 · 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
PIZZI MICHAEL A
Officer
$2.52M
@ $136.92 · 2025-01-21
SAPERSTEIN ANDREW MICHAEL
President
$4.20M
@ $136.43 · 2025-01-21
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
SO
5
Sells (3M)
13
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $5.63M
KIM MATTHEW M.
Officer
$8,273
@ $82.73 · 2026-10-01
SENA PETER P III
Officer
$377,925
@ $88.59 · 2026-09-03
KIM MATTHEW M.
Officer
$124,418
@ $88.87 · 2026-09-03
KIM MATTHEW M.
Officer
$8,845
@ $88.45 · 2026-09-01
SPAINHOUR STERLING A. JR.
Officer
$313,369
@ $94.02 · 2026-08-06
KIM MATTHEW M.
Officer
$9,428
@ $94.28 · 2026-08-03
KIM MATTHEW M.
Officer
$9,577
@ $95.77 · 2026-07-01
KIM MATTHEW M.
Officer
$9,116
@ $91.16 · 2026-06-01
KIM MATTHEW M.
Officer
$9,657
@ $96.57 · 2026-05-01
GREENE KIMBERLY S
Officer
$2.42M
@ $96.67 · 2026-03-30
CUMMISKEY CHRISTOPHER
Officer
$643,892
@ $96.55 · 2026-03-19
CONNALLY STANLEY W JR
Chief Operating Officer
$1.21M
@ $97.13 · 2026-03-18
KIM MATTHEW M.
Officer
$487,453
@ $95.15 · 2026-02-24
ANDERSON BRYAN D
Officer
$582,309
@ $93.83 · 2025-09-30
SPAINHOUR STERLING A. JR.
Officer
$226,148
@ $95.02 · 2025-08-11
GREENE KIMBERLY S
Officer
$1.25M
@ $95.00 · 2025-07-21
CUMMISKEY CHRISTOPHER
Officer
$1.10M
@ $89.54 · 2025-05-23
CONNALLY STANLEY W JR
Chief Operating Officer
$1.15M
@ $92.24 · 2025-03-31
GREENE KIMBERLY S
Chief Executive Officer
$3.00M
@ $93.12 · 2025-03-10
DAVIS MARTIN BERNARD
Chief Technology Officer
$100,811
@ $89.61 · 2025-03-03
WOMACK CHRISTOPHER C.
Chief Executive Officer
$2.20M
@ $90.13 · 2025-03-03
WOMACK CHRISTOPHER C.
Chief Executive Officer
$143,370
@ $90.00 · 2025-02-25
CUMMISKEY CHRISTOPHER
Officer
$81,184
@ $86.00 · 2025-02-19
PEOPLES JAMES JEFFREY
Chief Executive Officer
$1.25M
@ $86.00 · 2025-02-11
CUMMISKEY CHRISTOPHER
Officer
$69,739
@ $83.32 · 2025-02-04
DAVIS MARTIN BERNARD
Chief Technology Officer
$100,503
@ $85.90 · 2024-12-05
WOMACK CHRISTOPHER C.
Chief Executive Officer
$1.21M
@ $86.18 · 2024-12-05
SPAINHOUR STERLING A. JR.
Officer
$70,212
@ $88.54 · 2024-11-04
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(49/100)

"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.
SO
FearGreed
😏Greed(65/100)

"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 →
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 (49)
SO
⚪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 (65)
View MS Full AnalysisView SO Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: MS vs SO

Is Morgan Stanley or The Southern Company more undervalued in 2026?▼

Based on our discounted cash flow model, MS trades at a 41.3% margin of safety (intrinsic value $314 vs. price $184), compared to SO's -583.8% margin of safety (intrinsic $14 vs. $94).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Morgan Stanley or The Southern Company?▼

MS scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while SO scores 26/100 (None 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. SO scores 0.9 (Distress 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 The Southern Company?▼

SO earns 5.9% ROIC versus MS's 3.5%. 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, Morgan Stanley's or The Southern Company's?▼

MS's dividend earns a safety score of 79/100 (Safe), compared to SO's 63/100 (Safe). MS has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.

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