Compare StocksNVDA vs PG

NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) vs Procter & Gamble Company (The) (PG): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-08-03, NVDA is overvalued at $201, with a DCF intrinsic value of $163 and a margin of safety of -23%. 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.

NVDA
NVIDIA Corporation
$200.75
VS
PG
Procter & Gamble Company (The)
$144.49

Rewards

NVDA
  • NVIDIA Corporation has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
  • Gross margin of 74.1% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 193.9% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
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

NVDA
  • FCF yield of 2.0% is below 3%, meaning the market is pricing in substantial future growth to justify the current price.
  • Beneish M-Score of -1.06 flags financial patterns consistent with potential earnings manipulation — warrants further investigation.
  • 28 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
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 →
NVDA
PG
Valuation
$96.68B
Free Cash Flow
$12.84B
1.99%
FCF Yield
N/A
30.79
Trailing P/E
21.83
15.57
Forward P/E
19.50
Quality & Moat
63.06%
ROIC
15.19%
114.29%
ROE
30.29%
74.14%
Gross Margin
50.68%
0.55
PEG Ratio
5.57
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
0.45
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-0.24
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.02
0.50%
Dividend Yield
3.01%
NVDA: 8Ties: 1PG: 2
NVDAPG

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
NVDA

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 →
NVDA
$16.59
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$220.50B
Δ Market Cap
+$3.66T
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 →
NVDA
46.9% Margin of Safety
Price is 46.9% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $200.75
Fair Value: $378.18
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 →
NVDA

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $201?

+17.2%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +20.2%

The market implies +17.2% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +20.2%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

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 →
NVDA
69/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with roic consistency as the key competitive advantage. Improving revenue predictability 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.
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 →
NVDA
-1.06
Likely 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 →
NVDA
Insiders 4.0%Institutions 70.7%Retail & Other 25.3%
No. of Institutional Holders7,576
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 →
NVDA
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
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 →
NVDA
1
Sells (3M)
28
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $743.42M
DABIRI JOHN O
Director
$133,750
@ $214.00 · 2026-05-27
ROBERTSON DONALD F JR
Officer
$942,944
@ $174.75 · 2026-03-20
SHAH AARTI S
Director
$3.36M
@ $176.71 · 2026-03-19
DABIRI JOHN O
Director
$555,440
@ $184.90 · 2026-03-13
ROBERTSON DONALD F JR
Officer
$15.19M
@ $189.85 · 2026-01-02
ROBERTSON DONALD F JR
Officer
$4.43M
@ $179.98 · 2025-12-19
DABIRI JOHN O
Director
$112,317
@ $179.42 · 2025-11-24
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$5.20M
@ $207.91 · 2025-10-29
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$23.56M
@ $188.47 · 2025-10-28
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$40.73M
@ $181.04 · 2025-10-23
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$41.06M
@ $182.48 · 2025-10-20
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$41.34M
@ $183.73 · 2025-10-15
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$42.89M
@ $190.60 · 2025-10-10
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$42.05M
@ $186.89 · 2025-10-07
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$42.09M
@ $187.08 · 2025-10-02
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$40.23M
@ $178.82 · 2025-09-29
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$40.21M
@ $178.69 · 2025-09-24
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$39.18M
@ $174.14 · 2025-09-19
ROBERTSON DONALD F JR
Officer
$617,298
@ $176.37 · 2025-09-19
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$39.75M
@ $176.66 · 2025-09-16
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$39.28M
@ $174.59 · 2025-09-11
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$38.01M
@ $168.95 · 2025-09-08
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$38.61M
@ $171.60 · 2025-09-03
HUDSON BEACH DAWN E
Director
$15.38M
@ $170.90 · 2025-09-03
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$27.12M
@ $180.79 · 2025-08-15
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$40.96M
@ $182.04 · 2025-08-13
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$40.66M
@ $180.70 · 2025-08-08
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$39.78M
@ $176.80 · 2025-08-05
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$40.18M
@ $178.58 · 2025-07-31
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$39.16M
@ $174.02 · 2025-07-28
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$38.22M
@ $169.87 · 2025-07-23
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$38.71M
@ $172.05 · 2025-07-18
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$37.59M
@ $167.08 · 2025-07-15
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$36.43M
@ $161.91 · 2025-07-10
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$35.55M
@ $158.02 · 2025-07-07
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$35.16M
@ $156.27 · 2025-07-01
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$30.47M
@ $152.33 · 2025-06-26
HUANG JEN-HSUN
Chief Executive Officer
$14.40M
@ $144.04 · 2025-06-23
ROBERTSON DONALD F JR
Officer
$646,469
@ $143.66 · 2025-06-20
DABIRI JOHN O
Director
$91,608
@ $138.80 · 2025-05-30
BURGESS ROBERT KENNETH
Director
$6.74M
@ $134.82 · 2025-05-30
KRESS COLETTE M.
Chief Financial Officer
$7.79M
@ $116.83 · 2025-03-21
ROBERTSON DONALD F JR
Officer
$525,585
@ $116.80 · 2025-03-21
SHAH AARTI S
Director
$2.37M
@ $118.42 · 2025-03-20
BURGESS ROBERT KENNETH
Director
$6.16M
@ $115.49 · 2025-03-13
DABIRI JOHN O
Director
$292,930
@ $110.00 · 2025-03-10
KRESS COLETTE M.
Chief Financial Officer
$9.03M
@ $135.40 · 2024-12-13
ROBERTSON DONALD F JR
Officer
$608,775
@ $135.28 · 2024-12-13
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 →
NVDA
FearGreed
😐Neutral(51/100)

"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 →
NVDA
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 (51)
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 NVDA Full AnalysisView PG Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: NVDA vs PG

Is NVIDIA Corporation 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 NVDA's -22.9% margin of safety (intrinsic $163 vs. $201).

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

PG scores 94/100 (Wide moat), while NVDA scores 69/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Procter & Gamble Company (The) in financial distress?

PG's Altman Z-Score of 2.6 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. NVDA scores 4.7 (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, NVIDIA Corporation or Procter & Gamble Company (The)?

NVDA earns 63.1% ROIC versus PG's 15.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Does NVIDIA Corporation have accounting red flags?

NVDA's Beneish M-Score of -1.1 flags it as a likely earnings manipulator (above the -1.78 threshold). By contrast, PG scores -2.5, within the normal range. The Beneish model detects aggressive accounting through eight financial ratios.