Compare Stocks › MS vs XYL

Morgan Stanley (MS) vs Xylem Inc. (XYL): 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%. XYL is fairly valued at $92, with an intrinsic value of $112 and a margin of safety of 17%. Of the two, MS has the wider margin of safety.

MS
Morgan Stanley
$184.30
VS
XYL
Xylem Inc.
$92.40

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.
XYL
  • ★Free cash flow has grown at a 32.9% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $6.42 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
  • ★Trailing P/E of 20.5x is 50% below the historical average of 40.8x — potentially undervalued relative to its own history.

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.
XYL
  • ⚠Share count has increased by 35% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.
  • ⚠Despite buyback spending, shares outstanding increased in 3 out of 4 years — stock-based compensation is offsetting repurchases.
  • ⚠FCF yield of 5.7% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
MS
XYL
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$1.21B
N/A
FCF Yield
5.71%
14.62
Trailing P/E
20.49
13.50
Forward P/E
15.61
Quality & Moat
3.47%
ROIC
8.43%
13.84%
ROE
9.76%
87.31%
Gross Margin
39.32%
1.61
PEG Ratio
1.23
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
0.22
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
N/A
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.18
2.50%
Dividend Yield
1.86%
MS: 6Ties: 1XYL: 2
MSXYL

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.

XYL

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
XYL
$9.35
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$1.42B
Δ Market Cap
+$13.25B
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
XYL
17.2% Margin of Safety
Price is 17.2% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $92.40
Fair Value: $111.56
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
MS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

XYL

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $92?

+7.4%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +7.3%

The market implies +7.4% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +7.3%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

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.
XYL
52/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency 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 →
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.
XYL
-2.49
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.
XYL
Insiders 0.3%Institutions 99.8%
No. of Institutional Holders1,617
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
XYL
1
Buys (3M)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $1.13M
KOCH DALE CHRISTIAN
Director
$985,600
@ $89.60 · 2026-10-29
PERIBERE JEROME A
Director
$141,098
@ $116.61 · 2026-05-04
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
XYL
0
Sells (3M)
2
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $753,275
MCSHANE GERI-MICHELLE
Officer
$501,437
@ $117.46 · 2026-05-07
HARKER VICTORIA D
Director
$251,838
@ $148.14 · 2025-11-04
MCSHANE GERI-MICHELLE
Officer
$139,962
@ $139.96 · 2025-09-05
GLATCH LISA
Director
$689,231
@ $140.66 · 2025-08-18
HARKER VICTORIA D
Director
$258,542
@ $143.63 · 2025-08-04
MCSHANE GERI-MICHELLE
Officer
$527,978
@ $128.18 · 2025-03-07
CAPERS DOROTHY TREFON
General Counsel
$1.53M
@ $127.26 · 2025-03-04
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.
XYL
FearGreed
😨Fear(21/100)

"Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"

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)
XYL
⚪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: Fear (21)
View MS Full AnalysisView XYL Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: MS vs XYL

Is Morgan Stanley or Xylem Inc. 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 XYL's 17.2% margin of safety (intrinsic $112 vs. $92).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Morgan Stanley or Xylem Inc.?▼

MS scores 80/100 (Wide moat), while XYL scores 52/100 (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. XYL scores 4.6 (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, Morgan Stanley or Xylem Inc.?▼

XYL earns 8.4% 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 Xylem Inc.'s?▼

XYL's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to MS's 79/100 (Safe). XYL has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.