Does Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) have an economic moat?

MoatScan AI rates Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) 81/100 for moat strength, assessed across five sources of competitive advantage: network effects, switching costs, intangible assets, cost advantages and efficient scale. Microsoft has one of the strongest competitive positions in global technology, supported by an unusually broad platform spanning operating systems, productivity software, cloud infrastructure, collaboration, developer…

What is Microsoft Corporation's moat score?

Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) has a moat score of 81/100. The score is a weighted average of five pillar ratings: network effects, switching costs, intangible assets, cost advantages, and efficient scale. A higher score means the competitive advantages MoatScan AI identifies are wider and more durable.

Is MSFT stock overvalued or undervalued?

MoatScan AI answers this by estimating MSFT's intrinsic value with a discounted cash flow (DCF) model, then comparing that estimate to the current market price. A share price meaningfully below the estimate is flagged undervalued; meaningfully above it, overvalued. The estimate updates with each new financial analysis.

What is Microsoft Corporation's fair value estimate?

MoatScan AI derives Microsoft Corporation's (MSFT) fair value per share from a discounted cash flow (DCF) model built on the company's reported financials, analyst growth forecasts, and a discount rate reflecting its cost of capital. The Financial Analysis tab shows the estimate alongside every assumption behind it.

Back to Database

MSFT$506.06

Microsoft Corporation

Last Updated

Aug 14, 202613 days ago

Moat & Trend

Management

AI Impact

Competitive Radar

Moat Score

81/100

Executive Summary

Microsoft has one of the strongest competitive positions in global technology, supported by an unusually broad platform spanning operating systems, productivity software, cloud infrastructure, collaboration, developer tools, gaming, and AI. Its moat is strongest where products reinforce each other: Microsoft 365 leads into Teams and security, Windows still anchors enterprise endpoints, and Azure benefits from deep integration with enterprise identity and software stacks. The company also benefits from exceptional brand trust, large-scale distribution, and massive investment capacity. Weaknesses remain: cloud rivals are formidable, gaming is more cyclical, and antitrust scrutiny is persistent. Even so, Microsoft’s ecosystem breadth and enterprise entrenchment make its advantage structurally durable. The current direction is favorable as AI and cloud spending deepen customer lock-in and broaden the addressable value of its platform.

Network Effects

Ecosystem Reinforcement

Pillar Strength

8/10

Microsoft’s network effects are real, but they are strongest at the ecosystem level rather than in a pure consumer marketplace sense. Developers build around Windows, Azure, GitHub, and Visual Studio because that stack reaches a huge installed base and gives them access to enterprise buyers. Teams becomes more valuable when an organization’s employees, partners, and external contacts already use Microsoft identities and documents. LinkedIn also feeds hiring, sales, and productivity workflows, while Azure gains from the breadth of third-party software support. Multi-homing is common, so the network effect is not absolute, but each additional participant strengthens the platform and makes Microsoft a default choice in enterprise IT.

Switching Costs

Deep Workflow Lock-In

Pillar Strength

9/10

Switching costs are a major moat pillar for Microsoft. Enterprises often standardize on Microsoft 365, Windows, Entra identity, Intune, Defender, SQL Server, and Azure services in ways that create intertwined data, authentication, compliance, and training dependencies. Replacing one product is possible; replacing the full stack is operationally painful and risky. Migrating mailboxes, files, security policies, application integrations, and user habits can take years and expose firms to downtime and productivity loss. Teams and SharePoint add behavioral inertia because communication histories and document collaboration sit inside the platform. The result is a high-friction environment where customers may negotiate harder, but rarely rip out Microsoft wholesale.

Intangible Assets

Trusted Global Brand

Pillar Strength

9/10

Microsoft’s intangible assets are exceptionally strong. The company owns one of the most valuable brands in the world and has decades of enterprise credibility built through Windows, Office, and now Azure. That brand matters in procurement: CIOs, CIO staffs, and regulators know the company, its support model, and its compliance posture. Microsoft also holds a deep patent portfolio and proprietary platform technology that competitors cannot quickly duplicate, especially in enterprise security, identity, developer tooling, and cloud infrastructure. Open-source participation has improved its image without erasing proprietary strength. Although legal protection is not the only source of advantage, Microsoft’s reputation and IP portfolio meaningfully support pricing power and trust.

Cost Advantages

Hyperscale Efficiency

Pillar Strength

7.5/10

Microsoft has meaningful cost advantages, but they are not unbeatable. Its enormous scale in cloud, software distribution, and data center procurement creates operating leverage, and its proprietary silicon efforts should improve economics over time. The company can spread R&D, security, and compliance costs across a huge revenue base, which helps margins in software and cloud. Azure’s scale also supports better utilization and bargaining power with suppliers. However, Amazon and Google are similarly scaled, and all major cloud providers are investing heavily in capacity and chips. That means Microsoft’s cost position is advantageous, not dominant. The gap is wide enough to matter, but not so wide that rivals cannot compete effectively.

Efficient Scale

Oligopoly Infrastructure

Pillar Strength

7/10

Microsoft benefits from efficient scale in several important markets, especially enterprise cloud infrastructure and productivity software, where the economics favor only a few global winners. In cloud, the market has formed into a concentrated oligopoly with Amazon and Google as the main peers, while Microsoft remains one of the small set of providers large enough to serve regulated, mission-critical workloads at global scale. In desktop operating systems and office productivity, the installed base itself acts like an efficient-scale barrier because new entrants face enormous adoption and compatibility hurdles. Still, these are not natural monopolies; rivals remain viable and well funded. Microsoft’s scale supports the moat, but does not eliminate competition.

Moat Type & Trend

Why this company earns its moat rating, and where the moat is heading

Moat Type

Wide Moat

Trend

Positive

Why This Rating

Microsoft earns a Wide Moat because its advantage is not confined to one product line; it is built from a web of interlocking platforms that reinforce one another. Windows, Microsoft 365, Azure, Teams, GitHub, and LinkedIn create persistent workflows, identity, data, and developer relationships that are costly and disruptive to unwind. Even if individual offerings face competition, the combined ecosystem gives Microsoft durable control over enterprise standards, productivity habits, and cloud architecture. In 20 years, the company is still likely to sit inside core IT decision paths at thousands of large organizations, which is the hallmark of a deep structural advantage.

Why This Trend

The moat is strengthening because Microsoft is converting its installed base into higher-value cloud and AI workloads rather than merely defending legacy software. Azure growth, Teams scale, GitHub integration, custom chips like Maia and Cobalt, and the Copilot layer all deepen customer dependence on Microsoft’s stack. The trend would turn Stable or Negative if enterprises began unbundling identity, productivity, and cloud services at scale, or if AI adoption shifted to competing ecosystems without Microsoft retaining a central role.

Management Quality Assessment

Evaluating leadership track record, capital allocation, and governance

Verdict

Strong

Satya Nadella has led Microsoft since 2014 and, as CEO/chairman since 2021, has overseen a durable shift toward cloud and AI that materially improved growth and profitability. Capital allocation has been disciplined: ROIC is about 20% and remains well above estimated capital costs, while excess cash has been split between buybacks and dividends and larger acquisitions have generally extended core franchises (LinkedIn, GitHub, Nuance, Activision). Microsoft is hired-management led rather than founder-led, and that has supported a more pragmatic, portfolio-based strategy. Insider ownership is modest; the directional trend is unclear, though Nadella still owns a meaningful dollar stake. FY2025 CEO pay of $96.5 million is high, but performance has also been strong. No major board-independence red flags are evident.

Key Highlights

Nadella has been CEO since 2014 and chairman since 2021, giving him a long runway to reshape strategy and execution. Under his watch Microsoft pivoted decisively to cloud and AI, helping the company reach the $3 trillion market-cap milestone.
ROIC is about 20.5%, comfortably above the estimated 8-10% cost of capital, indicating value creation rather than empire-building. Microsoft also keeps debt low while returning cash through buybacks and dividends.
Acquisitions have mostly been strategically additive: LinkedIn, GitHub, Nuance, and Activision strengthened productivity, developer, healthcare AI, and gaming ecosystems rather than diversifying into unrelated areas. The portfolio suggests management buys assets that can be integrated into existing platforms.
Insider ownership is modest at roughly 0.1% of shares outstanding, with Nadella holding about 0.012%. That is enough for some alignment, but not the deep owner-operator profile seen at founder-led firms.
FY2025 CEO compensation was $96.5 million, which is very high in absolute terms but accompanied by strong operational and stock performance. The board appears robustly independent, with 12 of 13 directors independent and all standing committees composed of independent directors.

AI Impact Assessment

Evaluating how AI strengthens or disrupts existing moat pillars

AI Opportunity

6/ 10

AI Threat

5/ 10

Net AI Impact

+1Neutral

Net Reinforcer. Microsoft's AI moat is strongest where it already controls the workflow: Windows, Microsoft 365, Azure, GitHub, LinkedIn, identity, and security. AI should deepen lock-in by shifting AI from standalone models to integrated enterprise control planes, increasing cloud consumption and raising switching costs. The most defensible edge is proprietary context from GitHub and LinkedIn plus telemetry across the productivity and cloud stack, which rivals cannot quickly reproduce. But the core AI layer is not unique: foundation models are commoditizing, and Microsoft must spend heavily to stay competitive. Near-term uncertainty centers on whether AI usage grows fast enough to offset capex, partner dependence, and intensifying price competition.

AI Opportunity Highlights

Azure AI Foundry and Models as a Service can make Azure the default enterprise control plane for both Microsoft and third-party models, increasing workload retention.
GitHub and LinkedIn provide proprietary code and professional-work context that can improve Copilot relevance in ways rivals cannot quickly replicate.
Copilot and Agent 365 embed AI into Microsoft 365, Dynamics, and security, increasing switching costs and expanding monetization from seats to usage.
Frontier Company-style deployment services let Microsoft own governance, security, and measurement layers inside customer workflows, deepening platform lock-in.

AI Threat Highlights

Foundation model capabilities are becoming commoditized, which reduces differentiation for generic copilots and AI assistants.
Microsoft’s heavy GPU and infrastructure spending creates margin pressure if AI adoption does not scale quickly enough.
Reliance on external model partners exposes Microsoft to substitution and economics risk if OpenAI or other providers shift terms or performance.
Google, Amazon, Meta, and specialized startups can bundle comparable AI features into cloud and productivity stacks, increasing price competition.

Sign in to see the full analysis

The Strategic Factor Breakdown, Management Quality Assessment, and AI Impact Assessment are available to registered users — it's free.

Last Updated

Aug 11, 202617 days ago

Target Price

Analyst Consensus

FAIR VALUE

Financial Strength

Financial Score

84/100

Executive Summary

Microsoft’s standout strength is its exceptional, highly diversified cash-generating engine, supported by elite profitability and a fortress-like balance sheet. Revenue expanded from $211.9 billion to $331.8 billion across FY23–FY26, while net income rose to $133.7 billion, reflecting strong operating leverage despite rising R&D, SG&A, and a higher FY26 tax burden. Cash flow remains impressive, with operating cash flow reaching $182.9 billion and free cash flow still ample despite a surge in capital expenditures tied to heavy reinvestment. Liquidity and solvency remain excellent, with positive working capital, modest debt, and equity more than doubling over the period, though current liabilities and lower cash balances merit monitoring. Growth and analyst expectations remain constructive, while efficiency has softened modestly as asset turnover drifts lower. Overall, Microsoft presents a robust, high-quality financial profile consistent with its strong 8/10 to 8.5/10 ratings.

Income Statement

Revenue · Margins · Profitability

Section Score

8.5/10

Assuming Microsoft is a software and cloud platform company, the income statement shows excellent multi-year growth: revenue rose from $211.9B to $331.8B over FY23-FY26, while net income climbed from $72.4B to $133.7B. TTM revenue matches FY26, suggesting growth remains strong rather than decelerating sharply. Gross margin and operating margin remain very robust, with operating income growing faster than revenue, indicating good operating leverage despite rising R&D and SG&A. Earnings quality is generally strong, though other income/expense was volatile and FY26 tax expense jumped meaningfully, which tempers net income growth. Relative to large-cap software norms, these are elite results, with the main flags being rising costs and some below-the-line volatility.

Financials are in millions USD unless otherwise specified

Metric	TTM	FY 2026	FY 2025	FY 2024	FY 2023
Period Ending	Jun 30, 2026	Jun 30, 2026	Jun 30, 2025	Jun 30, 2024	Jun 30, 2023
Revenue	331,839	331,839	281,724	245,122	211,915
Revenue Growth	0.00%	17.79%	14.93%	15.67%	—
Net Income	133,749	133,749	101,832	88,136	72,361
Net Income Growth	0.00%	31.34%	15.54%	21.80%	—

Data as of Jun 30, 2026

Balance Sheet

Assets · Liabilities · Equity

Section Score

8.5/10

Microsoft shows a very strong balance sheet overall. Total assets rose steadily from $412.0B in FY2023 to $758.4B in FY2026, while shareholders’ equity more than doubled from $206.2B to $442.4B, indicating a robust and expanding capital base. Liquidity remains solid: total current assets of $207.7B still exceed total current liabilities of $168.8B, leaving positive working capital of $38.9B. Cash and short-term investments are lower than prior peaks at $76.7B, but still substantial. Leverage is manageable, with total debt declining to $56.8B and liabilities remaining well covered by assets and equity. The main watchpoint is rising current liabilities, but overall balance sheet quality and solvency remain excellent.

Financials are in millions USD unless otherwise specified

Metric	TTM	FY 2026	FY 2025	FY 2024	FY 2023
Period Ending	Jun 30, 2026	Jun 30, 2026	Jun 30, 2025	Jun 30, 2024	Jun 30, 2023
Total Current Assets	207,710	207,710	191,131	159,734	184,257
Total Assets	758,376	758,376	619,003	512,163	411,976
Total Current Liabilities	168,825	168,825	141,218	125,286	104,149
Total Liabilities	315,989	315,989	275,524	243,686	205,753

Data as of Jun 30, 2026

Cash Flow Statement

Operations · Investing · Financing

Section Score

8.5/10

Microsoft shows very strong cash generation, with operating cash flow rising from $87.6B in FY2023 to $182.9B in FY2026, and the TTM matching the latest year. Free cash flow remains substantial at $67.0B, but it has declined from $74.1B in FY2024 as capital expenditures accelerated sharply to $115.9B, signaling heavy reinvestment. Working capital movements were mixed and somewhat negative in FY2025 and FY2026, but not alarming given the scale of operating cash inflows. Net income and CFO both trend higher, supported by depreciation, amortization, and stock compensation. Capital returns are disciplined, with consistent dividends and buybacks, while debt activity appears limited and manageable.

Financials are in millions USD unless otherwise specified

Metric	TTM	FY 2026	FY 2025	FY 2024	FY 2023
Period Ending	Jun 30, 2026	Jun 30, 2026	Jun 30, 2025	Jun 30, 2024	Jun 30, 2023
Operating Cash Flow	182,935	182,935	136,162	118,548	87,582
Operating Cash Flow Growth	0.00%	34.35%	14.86%	35.36%	—
Free Cash Flow	66,987	66,987	71,611	74,071	59,475
Free Cash Flow Growth	0.00%	-6.46%	-3.32%	24.54%	—

Data as of Jun 30, 2026

Key Ratios

Liquidity · Leverage · Efficiency · Returns

Section Score

8/10

Microsoft shows a very strong liquidity position, with current and quick ratios remaining far above 1.0 throughout the period, even though both have eased from FY2023 levels. Cash coverage has also declined, but short-term obligations still appear comfortably covered. Leverage has improved meaningfully, with debt-to-equity and long-term debt-to-equity falling steadily, indicating a more conservative capital structure. Efficiency is mixed: asset turnover has drifted lower, suggesting the company is generating slightly less revenue per asset base over time. Profitability remains excellent overall, with operating, pre-tax, and net margins strong and generally improving, while ROE and ROA stay healthy despite some variation. Overall, the profile is robust, with only modest efficiency pressure and a slight liquidity trend decline.

Ratios are dimensionless unless otherwise noted

Metric	Current	FY 2026	FY 2025	FY 2024	FY 2023
Period Ending	—	Jun 30, 2026	Jun 30, 2025	Jun 30, 2024	Jun 30, 2023
Current Ratio	123.033	123.033	135.345	127.495	176.917
Quick Ratio	122.205	122.205	134.68	126.501	174.516
Profit Margin	40.31%	40.31%	36.15%	35.96%	34.15%
After Tax ROE	30.233	30.233	29.647	32.828	35.089
Return on Assets	17.64%	17.64%	16.45%	17.21%	17.56%
Debt to Equity	0.13	0.13	0.18	0.25	0.29
P/E Ratio	28.19	22.22	38.44	38.73	36.89
Forward P/E	21.56	19.19	33.11	33.33	30.86

Data as of Jun 30, 2026

Growth

Revenue · EPS · Valuation · Estimates

Section Score

8.5/10

Microsoft shows a strong compounding pattern, with revenue rising from 211.91B USD to 467.60B USD across the period and the forward outlook continuing that momentum. Growth eased slightly in FY 2025, then re-accelerated through FY 2026 and remains near high-teens levels in the following years, suggesting sustained demand rather than a one-off spike. EPS has been more variable, but the overall trend is still upward, and forecast EPS growth stays solid at 13.87% and 19.3%, indicating continued margin support even as revenue growth remains robust. Analyst sentiment is clearly positive: a Strong Buy consensus from 53 analysts, with a 400 to 870 USD target range, and the recommendation mix has been stable to slightly improving as Strong Buy counts edge higher while Holds remain low.

Analyst Price Targets

Low$400-20.96%

Median$550+8.68%

Average$563.84+11.42%

High$870+71.92%

Strong BuyConsensus rating based on analyst coverage

53 analysts

Recommendation Trends

Rating	Aug '26	Jul '26	Jun '26	May '26
Strong Buy	14	14	13	12
Buy	39	40	41	41
Hold	3	3	3	3
Sell	0	0	0	0
Strong Sell	0	0	0	0
Total	56	57	57	56

Forecast · Analyst Estimates

Revenue This Year390.96B

+17.82%from 331.84B

FY 2027

Revenue Next Year467.60B

+19.60%from 390.96B

FY 2028

EPS This Year· non-GAAP adj.19.68

+13.87%

FY 2027

EPS Next Year· non-GAAP adj.23.47

+19.30%

FY 2028

Historical · Reported Actuals

Metric	FY 2026	FY 2025	FY 2024	FY 2023
Revenue	331.84B	281.72B	245.12B	211.91B
Revenue Growth	+17.79%	+14.93%	+15.67%	—
EPS (GAAP diluted)	17.95	13.64	11.80	9.68
EPS Growth	+31.60%	+15.59%	+21.90%	—

Revenue in USD · EPS per share · Price targets in USD

Data as of Jun 30, 2026 · Forecast EPS is analyst non-GAAP adjusted; historical EPS is GAAP diluted — not directly comparable.

Fair Value Estimation

DCF · +23.3% Margin of Safety · Undervalued

AI Fair Value Estimate (DCF)

$623.8vs$506.06

Margin of Safety+23.3%

Undervalued — Margin of safety detected

A discounted cash flow framework is well suited to Microsoft because the business is highly cash-generative, scales efficiently, and has a long runway for forecasting operating cash flow with reasonable confidence. The projected path points to expanding margins alongside disciplined capital intensity, with free cash flow rising steadily faster than revenue as the mix shifts toward higher-value software and cloud services, while growth naturally fades into a terminal phase.

AI Valuation Verdict

A DCF is the right lens for Microsoft because the company combines recurring revenue, strong cash conversion, and a durable operating ramp that can be modeled over a multi-year horizon. Under a 7.7% discount rate and 4% terminal growth, the valuation assumes revenue rising from 347,709 million to 582,309 million over seven years, with EBITDA margins holding near 70% and capex staying disciplined. That produces a fair value of 623.8 USD per share versus a current price of 506.06 USD, implying a 23.27% margin of safety and an undervalued verdict. The case is most sensitive to WACC, terminal growth, and margin durability.

DCF Assumptions

WACC

7.7%

Weighted avg cost of capital

Revenue Growth (7Y)

9.0%

CAGR assumption

EBITDA Margin

70.0%

Steady-state projection

CapEx / Revenue

20.3%

Capital investment

Terminal Growth

4.0%

Long-run growth rate

Projection Period

7 yrs

Explicit forecast horizon

Projected Cash Flows

Values in millions USD

Year	Revenue	EBITDA	FCF	Discounted FCF
Yr 1	347,709	230,860	117,884	109,456
Yr 2	379,961	261,834	142,003	122,424
Yr 3	423,664	297,784	163,118	130,573
Yr 4	462,109	329,463	179,432	133,364
Yr 5	502,463	354,230	191,791	132,358
Yr 6	540,243	383,560	211,306	135,400
Yr 7	582,309	415,771	228,967	136,227
Terminal Value (PV)				3,829,081

Sign in to see the full analysis

The Income Statement, Balance Sheet, Cash Flow, Key Ratios, Forecast, and Fair Value analysis are available to registered users — it's free.

Last Updated

Aug 12, 2026

Short Term

Medium Term

Long Term

Price Outlook

$503.81Price at Analysis

The path of least resistance remains modestly higher as long as MSFT holds above $500.69 and $497.12, with $505.1 and then $511.78 the most relevant upside checkpoints. If momentum fades, a retest of $500.69 is the key downside risk, with a deeper pullback exposing the $493.39 weekly pivot area and then $481.86.

Technical Overview

MSFT’s technical profile is strongest in the near term, where price remains above all key moving averages and MACD is positive, but the rally is already extended enough that RSI is flashing overbought conditions. The intermediate picture is less clean: price is still well above the 50-day and 200-day moving averages and the broader range trend is upward, yet the Death Cross territory signal keeps conviction from becoming outright exuberant. Longer term, the stock remains structurally constructive because it is trading in the upper third of the 52-week range and above the 200-day average, even if volatility is elevated. The key levels to watch are $502.9 and $500.69 on the downside, with $511.78 to $523.57 acting as the next important resistance band.

Short Term

1 to 4 weeks

Bullish

MSFT’s short-term setup is constructive, with price holding well above the 20-day moving average and MACD still positive. However, RSI at 87.4 is deeply overbought and relative volume is contracting, so momentum is strong but increasingly stretched rather than cleanly impulsive.

Key Indicators

Price vs 20-day MA+15.68% above

Price vs 50-day MA+22.98% above

RSI (14-day)87.4

RSI InterpretationOverbought

MACD TrendBullish (above signal)

Bollinger PositionUpper half

Volume TrendContracting

Support

$500.69$497.12

Resistance

$505.10$508.68$512.02

The nearest short-term pivot is the daily PP at $502.9, with support at $500.69 and $497.12 and resistance clustered at $505.1, $508.68, and $512.02. Given the current price sits just above the pivot, a quick retest of $505.1 is the most immediate scenario, while $500.69 is the key near-term downside level to watch over the next 1–4 weeks.

Medium Term

1 to 6 months

Neutral

The intermediate trend remains supported by price trading above both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages and by the broader uptrend in the 52-week range. That said, the MA cross signal sitting in Death Cross territory tempers the bullish case and suggests the medium-term picture is mixed rather than decisive.

Key Indicators

Price vs 50-day MA+22.98% above

Price vs 200-day MA+16.37% above

52-Week Range PositionUpper third (76%)

Trend DirectionUptrend

MA Cross SignalDeath Cross territory

Relative Volume0.57x avg

Support

$481.86$474.74$463.21

Resistance

$504.92$511.78$523.57

Weekly pivots place support at $481.86, $474.74, and $463.21, with resistance at $504.92, $511.78, and $523.57; the $504.92 level also closely aligns with the current price zone and nearby short-term pivot structure. Over 1–6 months, the most plausible tests are the upper weekly resistance band near $511.78 to $523.57 if trend strength persists, while $481.86 is the first meaningful support if momentum fades.

Long Term

6 months and beyond

Bullish

Long-term structure remains favorable because MSFT is still materially above the 200-day moving average and positioned in the upper third of its 52-week range. The Death Cross territory signal is a cautionary overlay, but the broader trend and elevated price location argue for a constructive long-horizon bias.

Key Indicators

Price vs 200-day MA+16.37% above

52-Week High$553.72

52-Week Low$349.20

Distance from 52w High-9.0%

BB Bandwidth45.3%

MA CrossoverNone detected

Support

$496.59$492.75$470.68

Resistance

$528.46$590.08

Monthly structure is anchored by support at $496.59, $492.75, and $470.68, with resistance at $528.46 and then $590.08. Over 6+ months, this keeps the market bounded between a broad mid-$400s support shelf and the prior 52-week high area near $528.46, with any decisive move beyond that level likely requiring a sustained expansion in trend strength.

Sign in to see the full analysis

See the full short, medium & long-term indicator breakdowns and support/resistance levels — free for registered users.

Frequently asked questions about Microsoft Corporation

Does Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) have an economic moat?: MoatScan AI rates Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) 81/100 for moat strength, assessed across five sources of competitive advantage: network effects, switching costs, intangible assets, cost advantages and efficient scale. Microsoft has one of the strongest competitive positions in global technology, supported by an unusually broad platform spanning operating systems, productivity software, cloud infrastructure, collaboration, developer…Sign in free to see the Moat Type verdict and the pillar-by-pillar reasoning.
What is Microsoft Corporation's moat score?: Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) has a moat score of 81/100. The score is a weighted average of five pillar ratings: network effects, switching costs, intangible assets, cost advantages, and efficient scale. A higher score means the competitive advantages MoatScan AI identifies are wider and more durable.Sign in free to see each pillar rating, the Moat Type verdict and the moat trend.
Is MSFT stock overvalued or undervalued?: MoatScan AI answers this by estimating MSFT's intrinsic value with a discounted cash flow (DCF) model, then comparing that estimate to the current market price. A share price meaningfully below the estimate is flagged undervalued; meaningfully above it, overvalued. The estimate updates with each new financial analysis.Sign in free to see the fair value estimate, the implied upside or downside, and the verdict.
What is Microsoft Corporation's fair value estimate?: MoatScan AI derives Microsoft Corporation's (MSFT) fair value per share from a discounted cash flow (DCF) model built on the company's reported financials, analyst growth forecasts, and a discount rate reflecting its cost of capital. The Financial Analysis tab shows the estimate alongside every assumption behind it.Sign in free to see the estimate and the full assumptions behind it.

View all

View all wide moat stocks

Disclaimer: The analysis on this page is generated by AI and is provided for informational purposes only. It does not constitute financial advice, investment recommendations, or an offer to buy or sell any security. Always conduct your own due diligence and consult a qualified financial adviser before making any investment decisions.

MSFT$506.06

Sign in to see the full analysis

Sign in to see the full analysis

Sign in to see the full analysis

Frequently asked questions about Microsoft Corporation

Other Wide Moat companies