Compare StocksTSLA vs ZTS

Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) vs Zoetis Inc. (ZTS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, TSLA is overvalued at $400, with a DCF intrinsic value of $131 and a margin of safety of -206%. ZTS is undervalued at $79, with an intrinsic value of $119 and a margin of safety of 34%. Of the two, ZTS has the wider margin of safety.

TSLA
Tesla, Inc.
$400.49
VS
ZTS
Zoetis Inc.
$78.71

Rewards

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.
ZTS
  • Zoetis Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 71.8% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Zoetis Inc. scores 97/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.

Risks

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.
ZTS
  • FCF yield of 5.4% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
  • High leverage (2.26x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
TSLA
ZTS
Valuation
$5.25B
Free Cash Flow
$1.78B
0.35%
FCF Yield
5.40%
367.42
Trailing P/E
12.90
160.20
Forward P/E
10.60
Quality & Moat
3.23%
ROIC
22.05%
4.90%
ROE
67.75%
19.06%
Gross Margin
71.84%
5.78
PEG Ratio
1.90
Balance Sheet Safety
Net cash
Net Debt / Equity
2.26
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
-2.60
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.80
0.00%
Dividend Yield
2.67%
TSLA: 3Ties: 1ZTS: 8
TSLAZTS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
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.

ZTS

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 →
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
ZTS
$-2.82
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$5.14B
Δ Market Cap
$-14.51B
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 →
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
ZTS
33.8% Margin of Safety
Price is 33.8% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $78.71
Fair Value: $118.86
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
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.

ZTS

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $79?

+3.9%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +9.4%

The market implies +3.9% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +9.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
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.
ZTS
97/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency 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 4 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
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.
ZTS
-2.47
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 →
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.
ZTS
Insiders 0.2%Institutions 102.9%
No. of Institutional Holders2,290
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 →
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
ZTS
3
Buys (3M)
3
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $886,367
BISARO PAUL M.
Director
$151,750
@ $75.88 · 2026-05-13
D AMELIO FRANK A
Director
$501,344
@ $75.39 · 2026-05-13
MCCALLISTER MICHAEL B
Director
$233,273
@ $77.76 · 2026-05-11
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 →
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
ZTS
0
Sells (3M)
1
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $2.54M
PECK KRISTIN C
Chief Executive Officer
$2.54M
@ $127.05 · 2026-02-17
LAGANO ROXANNE
Officer
$110,840
@ $170.00 · 2025-06-03
REED WILLIE M
Director
$201,029
@ $166.14 · 2025-03-11
LAGANO ROXANNE
Officer
$55,420
@ $170.00 · 2025-03-10
PECK KRISTIN C
Chief Executive Officer
$59,852
@ $156.68 · 2025-02-19
LAGANO ROXANNE
Officer
$55,805
@ $171.18 · 2025-02-11
POLZER ROBERT J
Officer
$617,028
@ $177.46 · 2024-11-25
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 →
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.
ZTS
FearGreed
😨Fear(34/100)

"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 →
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)
ZTS
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 (34)
View TSLA Full AnalysisView ZTS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: TSLA vs ZTS

Is Tesla, Inc. or Zoetis Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, ZTS trades at a 33.8% margin of safety (intrinsic value $119 vs. price $79), compared to TSLA's -206.1% margin of safety (intrinsic $131 vs. $400).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, Tesla, Inc. or Zoetis Inc.?

ZTS scores 97/100 (Wide 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.

Which company has better free cash flow, Tesla, Inc. or Zoetis Inc.?

Zoetis Inc. (ZTS) generates a 5.4% 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, Tesla, Inc. or Zoetis Inc.?

ZTS earns 22.0% 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.