Compare StocksNOC vs TSLA

Northrop Grumman Corporation (NOC) vs Tesla, Inc. (TSLA): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, NOC is fairly valued at $522, with a DCF intrinsic value of $531 and a margin of safety of 2%. TSLA is overvalued at $400, with an intrinsic value of $131 and a margin of safety of -206%. Of the two, NOC has the wider margin of safety.

NOC
Northrop Grumman Corporation
$521.50
VS
TSLA
Tesla, Inc.
$400.49

Rewards

NOC
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 31.1% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Trailing P/E of 16.3x is 26% below the historical average of 22.0x — potentially undervalued relative to its own history.
TSLA
  • Altman Z-Score of 19.94 indicates very low bankruptcy risk — the company is firmly in the safe zone.
  • Net debt/EBITDA of -2.6x means the company holds more cash than debt — a net cash position.

Risks

NOC
  • Gross margin of 20.5% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • PEG ratio of 4.11 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • 18 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
TSLA
  • ROIC has declined by 21.5 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • Gross margin of 19.1% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • Share count has increased by 19% over the past 4 years, diluting existing shareholders.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
NOC
TSLA
Valuation
$3.31B
Free Cash Flow
$5.25B
4.46%
FCF Yield
0.35%
16.34
Trailing P/E
367.42
17.30
Forward P/E
160.20
Quality & Moat
11.28%
ROIC
3.23%
28.51%
ROE
4.90%
20.52%
Gross Margin
19.06%
4.11
PEG Ratio
5.78
Balance Sheet Safety
0.90
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.12
Net Debt / EBITDA
-2.60
1.71%
Dividend Yield
0.00%
NOC: 8Ties: 1TSLA: 3
NOCTSLA

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
NOC

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.

TSLA

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 →
NOC
$-0.38
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$6.82B
Δ Market Cap
$-2.60B
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
TSLA
$50.04
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$25.92B
Δ Market Cap
+$1.30T
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 →
NOC
1.8% Margin of Safety
Price is 1.8% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $521.50
Fair Value: $531.22
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
TSLA
626.9% Overvalued
Price is 626.9% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $400.49
Fair Value: $55.09
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
NOC

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $522?

+8.6%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +11.8%

The market implies +8.6% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +11.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

TSLA

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $400?

+50.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +45.1%

The market implies +50.2% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +45.1%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
NOC
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.
TSLA
31/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability 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 4 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
NOC
-2.45
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.
TSLA
-2.86
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 →
NOC
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 84.4%Retail & Other 15.4%
No. of Institutional Holders2,307
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.
TSLA
Insiders 11.1%Institutions 44.9%Retail & Other 44.0%
No. of Institutional Holders5,237
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 →
NOC
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
TSLA
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $999.96M
MUSK ELON REEVE
Chief Executive Officer
$999.96M
@ $389.28 · 2025-09-12
GEBBIA JOSEPH
Director
$1.03M
@ $256.31 · 2025-04-24
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 →
NOC
1
Sells (3M)
18
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $26.77M
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$54,310
@ $571.68 · 2026-05-04
SIMPSON KATHRYN G.
General Counsel
$650,385
@ $745.00 · 2026-03-02
ROEDER ROSHAN S.
Officer
$1.26M
@ $720.00 · 2026-02-27
ROEDER ROSHAN S.
Officer
$372,541
@ $727.62 · 2026-02-19
SIMPSON KATHRYN G.
General Counsel
$141,158
@ $727.62 · 2026-02-19
HARDESTY MICHAEL A
Officer
$107,748
@ $732.98 · 2026-02-19
DAVIES BENJAMIN R
Officer
$1.58M
@ $719.62 · 2026-02-18
ROEDER ROSHAN S.
Officer
$223,414
@ $702.56 · 2026-02-17
SIMPSON KATHRYN G.
General Counsel
$547,294
@ $702.56 · 2026-02-17
HARDESTY MICHAEL A
Officer
$501,609
@ $701.55 · 2026-02-17
HARDESTY MICHAEL A
Officer
$550,411
@ $702.95 · 2026-02-13
WARDEN KATHY J
Chief Executive Officer
$14.18M
@ $708.82 · 2026-02-06
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$65,029
@ $684.52 · 2026-02-02
WARDEN KATHY J
Chief Executive Officer
$6.04M
@ $604.50 · 2026-01-06
ROEDER ROSHAN S.
Officer
$46,649
@ $555.35 · 2025-12-09
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$54,716
@ $564.08 · 2025-11-24
JONES THOMAS H.
Officer
$382,725
@ $525.00 · 2025-07-17
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$16,720
@ $506.67 · 2025-07-07
JONES THOMAS H.
Officer
$368,706
@ $505.77 · 2025-06-13
FLEMING ROBERT J
Officer
$1.77M
@ $505.77 · 2025-06-13
WARDEN KATHY J
Chief Executive Officer
$5.65M
@ $502.18 · 2025-06-13
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$16,120
@ $488.48 · 2025-06-05
ROEDER ROSHAN S.
Officer
$485,590
@ $490.00 · 2025-06-04
JONES THOMAS H.
Officer
$349,920
@ $480.00 · 2025-05-30
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$16,293
@ $493.73 · 2025-05-05
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$15,850
@ $480.30 · 2025-04-07
WARDEN KATHY J
Chief Executive Officer
$1.78M
@ $475.65 · 2025-03-06
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$15,631
@ $473.67 · 2025-03-05
DAVIES BENJAMIN R
Officer
$213,788
@ $460.75 · 2025-02-28
HARDESTY MICHAEL A
Officer
$875,873
@ $453.59 · 2025-02-24
SIMPSON KATHRYN G.
General Counsel
$444,098
@ $429.08 · 2025-02-20
DAVIES BENJAMIN R
Officer
$82,383
@ $429.08 · 2025-02-20
SIMPSON KATHRYN G.
General Counsel
$395,916
@ $445.35 · 2025-02-18
DAVIES BENJAMIN R
Officer
$130,488
@ $445.35 · 2025-02-18
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$15,843
@ $480.09 · 2025-02-05
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$15,072
@ $456.73 · 2025-01-06
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$15,886
@ $481.39 · 2024-12-05
DAVIES BENJAMIN R
Officer
$616,067
@ $532.93 · 2024-11-11
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$16,833
@ $510.09 · 2024-11-05
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$17,675
@ $535.61 · 2024-10-07
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$17,151
@ $519.73 · 2024-09-05
WELSH MARK A. III
Director
$17,546
@ $516.06 · 2024-08-29
JONES THOMAS H.
Officer
$695,000
@ $500.00 · 2024-08-02
JONES THOMAS H.
Officer
$1.30M
@ $469.25 · 2024-07-26
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
TSLA
4
Sells (3M)
10
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $62.72M
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.05M
@ $402.27 · 2026-06-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.35M
@ $450.00 · 2026-05-13
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$9.99M
@ $378.11 · 2026-04-30
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$9.27M
@ $359.33 · 2026-03-30
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$899,077
@ $397.12 · 2026-03-06
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$10.69M
@ $415.56 · 2026-02-25
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$25.61M
@ $450.66 · 2025-12-09
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.17M
@ $443.93 · 2025-12-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$918,137
@ $352.45 · 2025-09-08
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.77M
@ $295.26 · 2025-07-08
ZHU XIAOTONG
Officer
$4.86M
@ $323.81 · 2025-06-12
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$732,573
@ $285.71 · 2025-06-09
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.40M
@ $342.30 · 2025-06-03
EHRENPREIS IRA MATTHEW
Director
$170.64M
@ $357.30 · 2025-05-27
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$32.73M
@ $357.39 · 2025-05-27
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.05M
@ $350.11 · 2025-05-16
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.20M
@ $300.00 · 2025-05-09
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$30.81M
@ $274.12 · 2025-05-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.14M
@ $284.40 · 2025-05-01
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$32.10M
@ $285.58 · 2025-04-29
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.00M
@ $250.00 · 2025-04-07
MURDOCH JAMES RUPERT
Director
$13.19M
@ $240.79 · 2025-03-10
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$718,111
@ $268.75 · 2025-03-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$33.67M
@ $299.61 · 2025-03-03
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.78M
@ $296.02 · 2025-03-03
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$27.59M
@ $367.87 · 2025-02-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$43.16M
@ $384.04 · 2025-02-03
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.68M
@ $383.11 · 2025-02-03
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$41.16M
@ $411.63 · 2025-01-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.89M
@ $413.56 · 2025-01-06
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$975,015
@ $374.29 · 2024-12-06
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$35.25M
@ $352.54 · 2024-12-04
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$39.79M
@ $354.06 · 2024-12-02
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.48M
@ $354.43 · 2024-12-02
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$35.34M
@ $314.44 · 2024-11-15
WILSON - THOMPSON KATHLEEN
Director
$34.60M
@ $346.02 · 2024-11-11
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$3.80M
@ $316.91 · 2024-11-11
MUSK KIMBAL J
Director
$15.14M
@ $250.23 · 2024-11-01
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.01M
@ $251.76 · 2024-11-01
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$1.00M
@ $250.00 · 2024-10-24
TANEJA VAIBHAV
Chief Financial Officer
$2.00M
@ $250.00 · 2024-09-23
ZHU XIAOTONG
Officer
$65,867
@ $221.77 · 2024-09-06
DENHOLM ROBYN M
Director
$14.60M
@ $219.96 · 2024-07-25
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 →
NOC
FearGreed
😨Fear(36/100)

"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.
TSLA
FearGreed
😐Neutral(45/100)

"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 →
NOC
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 (36)
TSLA
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 (45)
View NOC Full AnalysisView TSLA Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: NOC vs TSLA

Is Northrop Grumman Corporation or Tesla, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, NOC trades at a 1.8% margin of safety (intrinsic value $531 vs. price $522), compared to TSLA's -206.1% margin of safety (intrinsic $131 vs. $400).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Northrop Grumman Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

NOC scores 68/100 (Narrow moat), while TSLA scores 31/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Northrop Grumman Corporation in financial distress?

NOC's Altman Z-Score of 3.0 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. TSLA scores 19.9 (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 company has better free cash flow, Northrop Grumman Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

Northrop Grumman Corporation (NOC) generates a 4.5% free cash flow yield, compared to Tesla, Inc.'s 0.3%. 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, Northrop Grumman Corporation or Tesla, Inc.?

NOC earns 11.3% ROIC versus TSLA's 3.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

NOC vs TSLA: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io