Skip to main content
Homepage
AGING Analysis Report
Aug 28, 2026
24 days ago · 100% complete
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Microsoft Corporation Common Stock (MSFT) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-09-22): Designation Watch · Gem Score -9 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 80 · Value -69 · Sentiment 63 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $254.15 vs $513.53 at analysis

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

Microsoft Corporation Common Stock

MSFT NASDAQ
Technology · Software - Infrastructure
Redmond, WA 98052-6399, United States microsoft.com Updated Aug 28, 3:47pm
Price
$513.58
Market Cap
$3.8T
Employees
223,000
Beta
1.10
Avg Volume
33,014,499
Last Dividend
$3.64
CEO
Mr. Satya Nadella

Microsoft Corporation Common Stock represents ownership in Microsoft Corporation, a global technology company focused on software, cloud services, devices, and digital solutions. Microsoft develops and supports a broad portfolio that includes productivity applications, operating systems, collaboration tools, cloud computing platforms, cybersecurity offerings, developer services, and business software used by organizations of all sizes. Its products and services serve consumers, enterprises, educational institutions, and public-sector customers across personal computing, enterprise infrastructure, and cloud-based environments. The company also provides devices and gaming-related products that extend its reach into consumer technology and interactive entertainment. Microsoft Corporation is widely recognized as a major participant in enterprise software and cloud infrastructure markets, with its services embedded across workplace productivity, software development, and information technology operations worldwide.

Runs with full report Generated: Jul 29, 2026 12:14am
Price Overview
Price at report time
$513.53
as of Aug 28, 6:22pm (24d ago)
Change · Aug 28
+8.47 (+1.68%)
Day Range
$504.87 – $517.78
52-Week Range
$349.20 – $553.72
50-Day MA
$430.65
200-Day MA
$431.18
Volume
28,953,449.00
Right now · live
Log in to get the live feed
Members see the real-time price and the move since this report (over 24d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 7,427,000,000.00
Float 7,414,481,428.00
Free Float 99.8%
High free float — 99.8% of shares trade freely, ~0.2% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 28, 2026 11:24pm (24d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 28, 2026 11:09pm (24d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 28, 2026 11:08pm
P/E · trailing (TTM) (Price per dollar of earnings over the past year — not a run-rate or forward P/E)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
28.61
Stock Price: $513.58
EPS (Diluted): 17.95
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
8.65
Stock Price: $513.58
Total Equity: $442.39B
Shares: 7,453,000,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
20.23
Market Cap: $3,750.35B
Total Debt: $40.29B
Cash: $20.94B
EBITDA: $189.54B
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$3.8T
Market Cap: $3,750.35B
Total Debt: $40.29B
Cash: $20.94B
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
67.9%
Gross Profit: $225.47B
Revenue: $331.84B
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
46.8%
Operating Income: $155.24B
Revenue: $331.84B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
40.3%
Net Income: $133.75B
Revenue: $331.84B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
30.2%
Net Income: $133.75B
Total Equity: $442.39B
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
27.1%
Operating Income: $155.24B
Tax Rate: 19.4%
Equity: $442.39B
Total Debt: $40.29B
Cash: $20.94B
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
1.23
Current Assets: $207.71B
Current Liabilities: $168.83B
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.09
Short-Term Debt: $9.23B
Long-Term Debt: $31.07B
Total Debt: $40.29B
Total Equity: $442.39B
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$44.52
Revenue: $331.84B
Shares: 7,453,000,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$59.36
Total Equity: $442.39B
Shares: 7,453,000,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$8.99
Operating CF: $182.94B
CapEx: -$115.95B
Shares: 7,453,000,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
0.7%
Last Dividend: $3.64
Stock Price: $513.58
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
19.8%
Dividends Paid: -$26.45B
Net Income: $133.75B
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 28, 2026 11:08pm
Compares MSFT against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 28, 2026 11:09pm (24d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Revenue $198.3B $211.9B $245.1B $281.7B $331.8B
Cost of Revenue $62.7B $65.9B $74.1B $87.8B $106.4B
Gross Profit $135.6B $146.1B $171.0B $193.9B $225.5B
Operating Expenses $52.2B $57.5B $61.6B $65.4B $70.2B
Operating Income $83.4B $88.5B $109.4B $128.5B $155.2B
Net Income $72.7B $72.4B $88.1B $101.8B $133.7B
EBITDA $96.0B $99.5B $124.6B $150.5B $189.5B
EPS $9.70 $9.72 $11.86 $13.70 $18.00
EPS (Diluted) $9.65 $9.68 $11.80 $13.64 $17.95
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 28, 2026 11:00pm (24d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Cash & Equivalents $13.9B $34.7B $18.3B $30.2B $20.9B
Total Current Assets $169.7B $184.3B $159.7B $191.1B $207.7B
Total Assets $364.8B $412.0B $512.2B $619.0B $758.4B
Current Liabilities $95.1B $104.1B $125.3B $141.2B $168.8B
Long-Term Debt $47.0B $42.0B $42.7B $40.2B $31.1B
Total Liabilities $198.3B $205.8B $243.7B $275.5B $316.0B
Total Equity $166.5B $206.2B $268.5B $343.5B $442.4B
Retained Earnings $84.3B $118.8B $173.1B $237.7B $328.3B
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 28, 2026 11:24pm (24d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Operating Cash Flow $89.0B $87.6B $118.5B $136.2B $182.9B
Capital Expenditure -$23.9B -$28.1B -$44.5B -$64.6B -$115.9B
Free Cash Flow $65.1B $59.5B $74.1B $71.6B $67.0B
Acquisitions (net)
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) $9.0B $2.8B $58.7B -$2.5B $3.0B
Dividends Paid -$18.1B -$19.8B -$21.8B -$24.1B -$26.4B
Stock Buybacks -$32.7B -$22.2B -$17.3B -$18.4B -$22.3B
Net Change in Cash -$293.0M $20.8B -$16.4B $11.9B -$9.3B
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 28, 2026 11:09pm (24d ago)
Metric 2023 2024 2025 2026
Revenue Growth +6.9% +15.7% +14.9% +17.8%
Gross Profit Growth +7.7% +17.1% +13.4% +16.3%
Operating Income Growth +6.2% +23.6% +17.4% +20.8%
Net Income Growth -0.5% +21.8% +15.5% +31.3%
EBITDA Growth +3.7% +25.2% +20.8% +25.9%
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 28, 2026 11:00pm (24d ago)
Date Dividend Declaration Record Payment
2026-08-20 $0.91
2026-05-21 $0.91
2026-02-19 $0.91
2025-11-20 $0.91
2025-08-21 $0.83
2025-05-15 $0.83
2025-02-20 $0.83
2024-11-21 $0.83
2024-08-15 $0.75
2024-05-15 $0.75
2024-02-14 $0.75
2023-11-15 $0.75
2023-08-16 $0.68
2023-05-17 $0.68
2023-02-15 $0.68
2022-11-16 $0.68
2022-08-17 $0.62
2022-05-18 $0.62
2022-02-16 $0.62
2021-11-17 $0.62
0Company Classification 1Industry Landscape 2Company Momentum 3Forward Projection 4aDCF Valuation 4bEarnings Power Value 4cAnchored PE 4dReverse DCF 4eRevenue-Based DCF 4fAnchored P/S 4gScenario Analysis 4hDividend Discount Model 4iBook Value Analysis 4jInsider Activity 4fCash Flow Quality 4gDebt Maturity Risk 4hMacro Environment 4iSector Intelligence 4jRevenue Confidence 4kSensitivity Analysis 4lSector Demand Cycle 5AI Investigation 5bThesis Evaluation 6Valuation Synthesis
computed not applicable 18 computed · 6 not applicable
Risk : Reward — upside vs downside from this company's own quarters
Computed 2026-09-22 02:02
-0.8 : 1 +1σ upside vs −1σ downside, from this company's own quarterly history
A +1σ run of quarters pays -52%; a −1σ run costs 63%. Ratio -0.8:1 (μ 16.5%, σ 4.2% floored by sector, 16 pairs).
CaseGrowthMarginFair valuevs price ($513.53)
Bull — recovery +31% 35.0% $326.90 -36%
Base — stabilizes +21% 35.0% $244.81 -52%
Bear — keeps slipping +10% 34.3% $177.14 -66%
Upside — a +1σ run of quarters (v2) +21% 35.0% $245.32 -52%
Stress — a −1σ run of quarters (v2) +12% 35.0% $191.12 -63%
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for MSFT — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-28 23:32

The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.

Growing Azure/AI infrastructure demand plus a five-quarter beat streak keeps Microsoft growing ~15-18% and gaining share on a 10% category, but the quarterly trend is decelerating and no realistic path reaches the 54% growth the price implies. conf 8/10
Share gain Category growing · Infrastructure software is growing ~10% (industry 9.9% 3-yr CAGR, category median recent growth 10.5%) with margins expanding industry-wide; Microsoft grew 17.8% — roughly 7.7pp faster — so it is taking share inside a healthy, steady category, not merely riding it.
Next 2 quarters
Growing
Cloud backlog and capacity coming online make mid-to-high-teens revenue growth and stronger EPS growth the base case for the next two prints. Five straight beats and constrained-demand commentary point to continued upside surprise, though the decelerating quarterly trend argues against a step-up in the growth rate itself.
↑ above expectations
Year 1
Growing
Full-year trajectory stays in the mid-teens on revenue with earnings growing faster on mix and scale. Nothing in the category (steady, 10% growth, expanding margins) or company position suggests a break; the constraint is capacity delivery, not demand.
≈ inline with expectations
Years 2–3
Growing
Structural earnings power still compounds: recurring enterprise contracts, share gain against a growing category, and AI attach on an installed base. But the law of large numbers plus rising depreciation on the AI buildout mean the growth rate normalizes toward the low-to-mid teens rather than accelerating.
↓ below expectations
The creme: each rung's call measured against what's already printed (vs analyst estimates · vs guidance / FY consensus · vs price-implied growth) — expectations in print are already in the price, so only the variant margin can pay. Hover a rung's chip for the margin read.
Growth drivers
77 Azure + AI infrastructure capacity — Cloud remains the dominant growth engine; management has consistently framed demand as capacity-constrained rather than demand-constrained, meaning revenue converts as datacenter capex lands. That converts capex into a visible revenue backlog rather than a hope.
66 Share gain vs category — Recent YoY 17.8% against industry ~10.1% — a +7.7pp gap. Microsoft is not merely riding the infrastructure-software tide; it is compounding faster than it, sustained across multiple years (16.4% revenue CAGR).
59 Earnings leverage above revenue — Earnings YoY 31.3% vs revenue 17.8%, and 23.2% earnings CAGR vs 16.4% revenue CAGR. Mix shift toward high-margin cloud/subscription plus industry-wide margin expansion (+2.3pp operating) is compounding EPS faster than the top line.
43 Attach-rate monetization of installed base — Copilot/E5/security seats are price-and-attach uplifts on an already-contracted enterprise base rather than new-logo hunting — a lower-friction growth mechanism than winning greenfield workloads.
37 Estimate-beat consistency — Five consecutive EPS beats (+5% to +13%), suggesting either conservative guidance practice or genuine under-modeling of cloud mix — either way the near-term print distribution skews upward.
Growth risks
83 Price-implied growth is unreachable — Reverse-DCF demands +54.1% against a house projection of 20.7% and a measured record near 16-18%. Nothing in the business's mechanics — not Azure, not Copilot attach — plausibly triples the trend rate. The structural rung is a growth business against an expectation it cannot meet.
51 Decelerating quarterly trend — Revenue confidence flags the quarterly trend as decelerating even while the annual number is strong. Law-of-large-numbers on a ~$300B revenue base means each incremental point of growth requires a larger absolute win.
59 Capex-driven FCF erosion — FCF CAGR is -4.9% while earnings CAGR is +23.2%. AI datacenter buildout is consuming the cash that growth used to generate; depreciation on that capex becomes a rising drag on reported margins in years 2-3 if AI revenue lands slower than the assets.
42 AI monetization ambiguity — Copilot seat revenue and inference-margin economics are not separately disclosed, so the market cannot distinguish durable revenue from pull-forward compute. Model-layer commoditization and hyperscaler price competition could compress the take rate on the AI layer.
24 Macro headwind on enterprise IT budgets — 10y at 4.67 and a flagged macro-headwind regime pressures discretionary seat expansion and new-project spend; renewals hold but optimization cycles trim consumption growth.
The world is rebuilding its compute base for AI, and the spend is flowing to the three hyperscalers that own both the silicon relationships and the enterprise contracts. Microsoft sits at the intersection: it monetizes the AI cycle twice — once as raw Azure capacity and again as attach revenue on a productivity base that nearly every large organization already licenses. That dual position is why it outgrows its own category. The offsetting change is that this growth is now capital-intensive in a way software never was: FCF is shrinking while earnings rise, converting Microsoft partway into an infrastructure business whose returns depend on utilization of depreciating assets. Rates at 4.67% raise the cost of that buildout. The business direction is solidly up; the question the world has already answered too generously is how steep.
Growth position composite +7
ShrinkingStallingHoldingGrowingAccelerating
70Next 2 quarters · Growing
70Year 1 · Growing
70Years 2–3 · Growing
+7Composite (−100…+100)
A research prediction, not advice. Forward-graded: each rung is scored against the prints that follow it. Not an input to the GEM designation — track record first.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-28 23:24:12
Verdict Modestly overvalued, not dramatically so — fair value $420-460 vs $513; wait for a 15%+ pullback or an Azure growth stumble to add, don't chase and don't short a business compounding earnings 23%.

Looking at the raw quarterlies first: revenue went $65.6B → $69.6B → $70.1B → $76.4B → $77.7B → $81.3B → $82.9B → $90.0B. That's not decelerating — the sequential in the June 2026 quarter is +8.6%, the biggest jump in the series, and YoY the latest print is +17.8% on a $330B base. Net income compounded 31% YoY. The "decelerating quarterly trend" flag in secondary signals looks wrong on the top line; it may be picking up the Dec-25 margin spike (47.3%, likely a one-time item — investment gain or tax benefit) reverting to a normal 38-40% range. Operating margin at the annual level is 46.8% and ROIC 27.1% on a $442B equity base. This is a business printing $155B of operating income and growing it >20%.

The synthesis calling MSFT 40.6% overvalued at a $305 fair value deserves pushback. FCF of $67B looks weak versus $183B operating cash flow because capex ran $116B — this is the AI infrastructure build. The bear thesis ("CapEx makes FCF math impossible") is the right question, but it assumes the capex is permanent opex-in-drag rather than a finite build cycle. If capex normalizes to ~$70B (still enormous), FCF snaps to $110B+ and the FCF yield on $3.75T becomes ~3% — reasonable for a 15%+ grower. The DCF pinning fair value at $305 is implicitly assuming either the growth fades hard or the capex never abates; both simultaneously is the bear case, and it's not obviously the base case given Azure's demonstrated pricing power and the $90B quarter we just observed. A $305 target implies ~16x earnings on trailing $134B NI — that's a mid-cycle industrial multiple for a business earning 27% on capital.

Where the contrarian actually has teeth: the FCF CAGR is -4.9% while earnings CAGR is +23% — that gap is the entire debate. If Copilot ASP compression is real (the thesis eval's 69-weight bear), and if hyperscaler capex stays at $110B+ for another 2-3 years, then earnings quality degrades and the $305 anchor becomes defensible. Insider activity is genuinely neutral-to-slightly-negative (two sales totaling ~15K shares, no buys), which for a stock up this much is unremarkable but not confirming. The 11.5x sales and 20x EV/EBITDA are rich but not insane for this margin structure — compare ORCL at similar multiples with worse ROIC and lower growth. The real risk isn't valuation mean-reversion to $305; it's a 15-20% derating to ~$430 if a single Azure quarter disappoints on growth (say <30% constant currency) or if capex guidance for FY27 goes up rather than down.

I partially dissent from the synthesis. $305 is too punitive — it treats the AI capex as permanent value destruction rather than an option premium on a real distribution advantage. But the thesis evaluators are right that at $513 and 11.5x sales, the stock has priced in a lot of AI monetization that hasn't fully shown up in segment disclosures yet. My read: fair value is probably $420-460 range, implying MSFT is 10-20% overvalued, not 40%. Not a short, not a buy here — a hold with a plan to add on any 15% drawdown that isn't accompanied by an Azure growth break below 30%. The models are directionally right that there's a premium to fundamentals; they're wrong about the magnitude because they're not crediting the observable acceleration in the last two quarters or the finite nature of the capex cycle.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-28 23:24:26
Verdict Fairly valued to modestly undervalued at $514 — rich multiples are supported by rare scale, 18% revenue growth, and 40% net margins; I’d see clear overvaluation only much above $575 without FCF recovery.

The numbers say Microsoft is not a “story stock” in the usual sense; it is a $332 billion revenue machine compounding fast enough to make a premium multiple rational. Revenue went from $198.3 billion in FY22 to $331.8 billion in FY26, a 67% increase in four years, while net income rose from $72.7 billion to $133.8 billion, up 84%. That is not just scale, it is accelerating scale: FY26 revenue grew 17.8% and net income 31.3%, with operating income reaching $155.2 billion and operating margin expanding to 46.8%. Quarterly progression is also unusually strong for a company of this size: from $65.6 billion revenue in the September 2024 quarter to $90.0 billion by June 2026. A business adding roughly $50 billion of annual revenue in one year and doing it while sustaining 40% net margins deserves more respect than a simple “mature earner” label.

What stands out most is that the market is paying 28.6x earnings, 11.5x sales, and 20.2x EV/EBITDA for a company generating 30.2% ROE and 27.1% ROIC with almost trivial leverage. Net debt is barely meaningful: $40.3 billion debt against $20.9 billion cash and $442.4 billion equity. Those valuation multiples are full in an absolute sense, but they are not absurd against a company whose earnings base is still growing above 20% CAGR and whose latest annual net margin is 40.3%. The bear case leans heavily on free cash flow dropping to $67.0 billion because capex exploded to $116.0 billion against $182.9 billion of operating cash flow. That deserves attention, but I read it less as deterioration than as deliberate capacity build. If Microsoft can convert that capex wave into sustained Azure/AI revenue and preserve anything close to current operating margins, today’s multiple is not expensive. The key point is that earnings quality has not broken while investment intensity has surged.

I also think the model-driven fair value around $305 is too anchored to near-term free cash flow and not sufficiently to economic earnings power. A $3.75 trillion market cap against $133.8 billion of net income is demanding, but not detached, especially when net income has increased by roughly $32 billion in a single year. If that annualized earnings power grows even into the mid-teens from here, the current price can be justified without heroic assumptions. Said differently: the market is already capitalizing Microsoft as a durable winner, but the raw data show a company that is actually earning its way into that status. The contradiction is that the bearish synthesis treats AI optionality as mostly narrative, while the income statement already shows unusually strong acceleration for a company this large.

The strongest pushback is obvious: free cash flow matters, and by that measure FY26 looks ugly. FCF of $67.0 billion on $331.8 billion revenue is only about a 20% conversion rate from net income, far below what investors historically expect from Microsoft. If capex at $116.0 billion is not a temporary buildout but the new normal, then the “cheap on earnings” argument is a trap because true owner cash flow is structurally lower. On that framing, 11.5x sales and 28.6x earnings are rich for a business facing real competition in cloud infrastructure and uncertain AI monetization. The quarterly net margin spike to 47.3% in December 2025 also flatters the run-rate, while the most recent quarter’s 39.7% may be a better baseline. A smart bear would say the stock is priced as if AI spend converts smoothly into high-margin software revenue, when it may instead remain a capital-intensive arms race.

What would change my mind is not another narrative about Copilot or AI leadership but evidence in the cash numbers. If capex stays above $110 billion while revenue growth slips toward low teens and operating margin stalls below 47%, then the stock is too expensive above $500 because the valuation assumes eventual cash harvest. Conversely, if over the next year Microsoft can keep revenue growth around 15%-18%, hold net margin near 40%, and lift free cash flow back toward $90-$100 billion even with elevated investment, then today’s price is defendable and probably conservative. For now I think the stock is not cheap, but the business performance is strong enough that calling it 40% overvalued is too bearish by a wide margin.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-28 23:24:55
Verdict Overvalued at $513; quality franchise but 1.8% FCF yield and 11.5× sales price in AI monetization the cash flows have not yet delivered (fair value zone closer to $350–400)

Microsoft’s fiscal 2026 print is unambiguous excellence on the income statement and a quiet crisis on the cash flow statement. Revenue climbed to $331.84B (+17.8% YoY), net income to $133.75B (+31.3%), and net margin hit 40.3%—the best full-year conversion in the five-year series. Sequential quarters show no stall: $77.7B → $81.3B → $82.9B → $90.0B, with the June quarter alone delivering $35.8B of profit. ROE at 30.2%, ROIC at 27.1%, and debt-to-equity at 0.09 confirm a fortress. Yet free cash flow collapsed to $66.99B against $182.94B of operating cash because capex absorbed $115.95B. FCF CAGR is already negative (−4.9%). At $3.75T market cap that is a 1.8% FCF yield—unacceptable for a “mature earner” unless the AI build-out is about to flip into high-margin incremental revenue at scale. The 28.6× P/E and 11.5× sales multiple are therefore not being earned by cash generation today; they are a pure claim on future monetization of that $116B spend.

The quantitative models calling ~$305 fair value (−40% from $513.58) are directionally correct but mechanically harsh. They under-weight the durability of the Office/Azure installed base and the 68% gross margin that still funds the arms race. Earnings CAGR of 23% and operating margin of 46.8% are not typical mature-software numbers; the market is rationally paying something above a traditional software multiple. The error is magnitude. A 28–30× multiple on $133.75B of earnings already embeds continued mid-teens growth and eventual FCF re-acceleration. With revenue growth already labeled “decelerating” in the secondary signals and Copilot adoption still unproven at the scale required to justify 11.5× sales, the residual $200+ of narrative premium is the entire bull case—and it is fragile.

The strongest opposing read is straightforward: Microsoft is the only hyperscaler with true enterprise distribution, the OpenAI relationship remains structurally advantaged, and history shows that once Azure utilization fills the new capacity, incremental margins expand violently. Bulls will note that $90B quarterly run-rate already implies ~$360B forward revenue, that net income grew twice as fast as revenue, and that a 20× EV/EBITDA is not outrageous for a company compounding earnings at 23% with a net-cash-capable balance sheet. They will argue the FCF trough is temporary and that any stabilization of capex intensity in the next two prints will re-rate the stock higher, not lower. That case is coherent; it simply requires the market to be right that AI monetization arrives before the multiple compresses. I weigh the cash-flow evidence more heavily because $116B of annual capex is not a rounding error—it is a structural claim on returns that have not yet appeared in FCF, and the 1.8% yield leaves almost no margin of safety if Azure growth settles into the low teens or Copilot attach rates disappoint.

I would reverse to neutral or constructive only on two concrete developments: (1) trailing-twelve-month free cash flow reclaims $110B+ while revenue growth holds ≥15%, proving the capex cycle is cresting, or (2) a clear, disclosed Azure AI / Copilot revenue run-rate that is growing faster than the core cloud business and carrying incremental margins above 40%. Absent those, the stock remains a high-quality compounder priced as if the AI payoff is already in the bag.

Qwen Reading local experiment · off-panel
Independent reading · qwen3.8:27b on the local GPU · generated 2026-08-28 16:20:52 · 46s (81.4 tok/s) · replay of 2026-07-29 panel
Fairly Valued · conviction 3/5 · bull 6/10
followed the VERDICT/STANCE contract
Verdict Microsoft at $393 is a 28% ROIC compounder in a capex-heavy phase, trading at 40x trailing FCF and 28.8x earnings — a fair price for the quality, but the 9.7% FCF CAGR means you are paying for a future that the capex must deliver, not for cash flow that is already here.

The number that should make you uncomfortable is not the 28.8x P/E or the 10.4x revenue multiple — it's the gap between the $136.16B in operating cash flow and the $71.61B in free cash flow. Microsoft is spending $64.55B a year on capex, which is 47% of its operating cash generation, and the FCF CAGR over the period is 9.7% while revenue CAGR is 15.3%. That divergence is the entire story compressed into two numbers: the top line is compounding at a healthy mid-teens pace, but the cash that actually reaches shareholders is growing at roughly half that rate because the AI data-center buildout is consuming the spread. At $2.92 trillion market cap, you are paying 40.8x trailing FCF. The 28.8x P/E looks reasonable next to a 15.5% earnings growth rate, but earnings are not the same as cash, and the capex line is not a temporary blip — it is the strategic bet. The market's implied 45.7% FCF growth assumption (per the thesis evaluation) requires that $64.5B annual spend to convert into roughly $20B+ of incremental high-margin revenue within two to three years. That is a 31%+ return on the capex base, which is achievable in software but demands that Azure AI workloads and Copilot monetization land on schedule, not in the "eventually" sense.

What I find genuinely impressive in the raw data is the operating leverage. Revenue went from $168.09B in FY2021 to $281.72B in FY2025, a 68% expansion, while operating income went from $69.92B to $128.53B — a 84% expansion. Operating margin climbed from 41.6% to 45.6%. ROIC sits at 28.3%, debt-to-equity is a trivial 0.18, and the balance sheet carries $30.24B in cash against $60.59B in total debt. This is not a company that needs the AI narrative to justify its existence; it is a cash machine that happens to be in the middle of a capital-intensive expansion. The quarterly revenue progression from $70.07B (Mar '25) to $82.89B (Mar '26) shows a consistent 18%+ YoY clip, and the "decelerating" flag in the secondary signals is, in my view, overstated — the QoQ steps are small but the YoY trajectory is stable and slightly accelerating.

The one data point I would flag as a genuine anomaly is the December 2025 quarter: $81.27B revenue with $38.46B net income, a 47.3% margin, versus 35.6–38.3% in every other quarter in the dataset. That is a $10B+ swing in net income that does not appear to be explained by revenue growth (the quarter was only 4.6% above September). Whether it is a tax benefit, a one-time gain, or an accounting artifact, it inflates the trailing P/E and makes the 28.8x multiple look cheaper than the normalized ~33–35x you get if you strip that quarter out. I would not underwrite the 47.3% margin as a run-rate.

The strongest case against my "fairly valued" read is the bear's: you are paying 40x FCF for a company whose FCF is growing at 10%, the capex cycle has no visible end date, and the competitive set (AWS, Google Cloud, open-source inference) is not standing still. A smart opponent would point out that the 28.8x P/E is 20% above the 5-year average of 24x, that the "platform-monopoly" narrative is doing real valuation work, and that the 9.3% dividend yield is irrelevant at a 23.65% payout ratio — this is a growth stock wearing a value stock's moat. I weigh this differently because the ROIC of 28.3% and the operating margin trajectory (41.6% → 45.6% in four years) tell me the business model is still expanding, not plateauing. A 28% ROIC company growing revenue at 15% is not a value trap; it is a compounder in a capex-heavy phase. The 40x FCF multiple compresses to 29x if FCF reaches $100B by FY2027, which requires only a 40% FCF increase over two years — aggressive but within the range of what the capex is designed to produce.

What would flip me: I would turn meaningfully bearish if the next two quarters show revenue growth below 12% YoY while capex stays above $60B, because that would confirm the buildout is not yet generating proportional revenue and the FCF trough is longer than the market assumes. I would turn more bullish if Azure growth re-accelerates above 30% and Copilot ARR is disclosed at a level that justifies the capex as a revenue-generating asset rather than a cost center. The December 2025 margin spike also needs a clean explanation in the next earnings call; if it was a one-time tax item, fine, but if it signals a structural margin shift, the P/E math changes materially.

Experiment only: this reading is not a panel seat and feeds nothing — compare it against the Claude, GPT and Grok readings above.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 2.7; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 2.0
overvalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -0.7 vs panel · self: 5.0
GPT gpt-5.4 5.0
fairly valued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +2.3 vs panel · self: 6.0
Grok grok-4.5 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -1.7 vs panel · self: 3.0
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), and General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-28 23:34:48
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Quality - wait for a dip 8/10
Fortress-quality compounder trading ~30% above deserved value into a hot AI tape - great business, wrong price to chase.
The cruxWhether AI capex converts to FCF growth fast enough to justify a $513 print; until that gap closes, the premium is the entire debate.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from MSFT's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionStable Share Count
Earnings QualityHigh Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+80
Fortress
edge √Σ 154 · risk √Σ 44 · conf 9/10

Revenue has scaled from 198.3B (FY22) to 331.8B (FY26) - a ~68% cumulative rise - while operating margin has expanded from 42.1% to 46.8% and net income has nearly doubled to 133.8B. Gross margin has held in a tight 67.9-69.8% band through massive AI-related capex, which is the main reason FCF has ticked down from 74.1B (FY24) to 67.0B (FY26) despite still-rising OCF (OCF/NI 1.3x). That is investment intensity, not deterioration. Earnings integrity is clean: accruals -5.2% of assets, Beneish M -2.66, Altman Z 8.9, and buybacks running 216% of SBC so diluted shares actually shrank slightly (7.54B to 7.45B) even with 3.7% SBC/revenue. Balance sheet is a fortress in kind if not scale: 76.8B liquid cash, 36.6B net cash, no external funding need. Insider tape shows only routine sells (Althoff 4.9M, Numoto 2.4M) and tax withholdings - not a directional signal for a company this size. The only genuine watch-item is the widening capex gap between reported earnings and FCF as AI infrastructure spend accelerates; per-share earnings power is expanding, but cash conversion is under pressure from the buildout.

Strengths 4
m90
Operating leverage while scaling
Revenue up 67% over four years (198.3B to 331.8B) with operating margin expanding 470 bps (42.1% to 46.8%) and net income up 84% to 133.8B - rare at this scale.
m78
Per-share discipline
Diluted shares fell from 7.54B to 7.45B; buybacks are 216% of SBC despite 3.7% SBC/revenue, so per-share value is genuinely protected.
m72
Clean earnings quality
Accruals -5.2% of assets, OCF/NI 1.3x, Beneish M -2.66, Altman Z 8.9 - no mechanical red flags; reported numbers look real.
m65
Self-funding with net cash
76.8B liquid cash, 36.6B net cash, 67.0B annual FCF - zero dependence on capital markets, fully funds its own AI buildout.
Concerns 2
m38
FCF conversion compressing on capex
FCF peaked at 74.1B in FY24 and fell to 67.0B in FY26 even as net income jumped to 133.8B - AI/datacenter capex is opening a real gap between earnings and cash.
m22
Gross margin softening at the edge
GM eased from 69.8% (FY24) to 67.9% (FY26), consistent with lower-margin AI infrastructure revenue mix - worth tracking though operating margin still expanded.
This is as close to a fortress as large-cap software gets. The business is compounding at 20%+ revenue growth from a 330B base with expanding operating margins, pristine accruals, net cash, and a shrinking share count - that combination is exceptionally rare. The one honest wrinkle is that FCF is no longer growing because capex is eating it; I read that as a bet on AI capacity rather than a quality break, but it does keep the grade a step below the very top rung. If capex normalizes and the revenue it funds shows up, this moves into the 90s. For now, robustly healthy across the board with one live watch-item.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Magnitude and multi-year commitment of AI/datacenter capex vs. contracted revenue backlog
  • Azure/AI segment gross margin disclosure to confirm mix effect on consolidated GM
  • Customer/hyperscale-tenant concentration in the AI compute business
  • Any off-balance-sheet financing or JV structures tied to GPU/datacenter buildout
  • OpenAI-related commitments, exposures, and accounting treatment
Valuation / Mispricing
-69
Rich
edge √Σ 34 · risk √Σ 119 · conf 7/10
Price $513 vs composite deserved ~$305 (quality-adjusted ~$380-420) - roughly 25-40% above deserved, no margin of safety. attractive below $380.00

The composite fair value of $299 (signal-adjusted $305) sits roughly 40% below the $513 price. The DCF pins deserved value near $211 and the EPV floor near $141, while only the anchored P/E ($634) supports today's tape - and that method essentially extrapolates the current premium multiple, so it is the least informative sanity check. Triangulating the cash-flow-based methods with a Fortress-quality uplift, deserved value is plausibly in the $350-$420 range, still below the current print. The market is paying a full multiple for a 330B revenue base already growing 20%+ with expanding margins, plus an option on Copilot/Azure AI monetization that has to compound for years to justify the gap. That is not a valuation error in the classic sense - it is a demanding price on a genuinely great business. Earnings quality is pristine and dilution is negative, so there is no haircut to apply; the richness is real, not accounting-driven. Margin of safety is negative: capex is already eating FCF growth, and any slippage in AI ROI or Azure growth deceleration would compress the multiple hard.

Cheap signals 2
m30
Fortress quality deserves a premium
20%+ growth on a 330B base, expanding margins, net cash, buybacks, and pristine accruals justify a valuation above the raw DCF - but not 40%+ above the composite.
m15
No earnings-quality haircut
High earnings quality (score 3) means the reported numbers are trustworthy, so the deserved value is not marked down for accruals or dilution.
Rich / priced-in 4
m70
Price 68% above composite FV
$513 vs composite $299 / signal-adjusted $305 implies -41% upside; even generous quality adjustments leave the stock above deserved value.
m65
DCF and EPV both well below price
DCF fair value $211 and EPV floor $141 bracket the cash-flow reality; only the anchored-PE at $634 supports today's price, and it simply echoes the current premium multiple.
m55
FCF growth stalled by AI capex
Reported FCF is no longer growing because capex is absorbing operating cash - the market is paying up-front for AI capacity that has yet to prove its return.
m45
Priced for flawless AI monetization
To justify $513 the bull case needs Copilot/Azure AI to compound materially for years; any deceleration in Azure or Copilot attach rates removes the premium.
I can't call this cheap with a straight face - the composite says $305, the DCF says $211, and I'm being asked to pay $513. Even generously crediting the Fortress quality and pristine earnings, deserved value tops out somewhere in the high $300s to low $400s. This is a great business at a demanding price; I'd want it closer to $380 before the risk/reward tilts my way. Not a short - just not a buy here.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Azure growth rate and AI contribution disclosure in the next earnings print
  • Capex trajectory and management's ROI framing on AI infrastructure
  • Copilot seat penetration and pricing across M365 base
  • Operating margin trend as AI capex flows through depreciation
General Sentiment
+63
Tailwind
tail √Σ 127 · head √Σ 53 · conf 7/10

The tape is risk-on and the mega-cap complex is doing the heavy lifting for the indices - MSFT is literally being cited in headlines as one of the 'titans masking market weakness.' That is a direct tailwind for this specific name: a beta-1.1 platform-monopoly with a strong, durable AI narrative is exactly the profile that absorbs money in a calm, low-VIX (14.4), narrative-driven tape. The story is also freshly reinforced by the $24.1B OpenAI revenue disclosure and the Moonshot/Kimi K3 Azure angle, both of which feed the 'essential AI infrastructure layer' bull frame.

Tailwinds 4
m72
Platform-monopoly AI narrative is strong and durable
Archetype fits the moment perfectly - enterprise AI infrastructure story with medium cult and durable intensity. This is the story money is chasing, and MSFT is the cleanest expression of it.
m65
Mega-cap leadership in a risk-on tape
VIX 14.4, risk-on regime, and press explicitly noting Microsoft and titans are holding up the indices - flows are concentrating into exactly this cohort while small caps and cyclicals lag.
m60
Fresh narrative-reinforcing news flow
$24.1B OpenAI revenue print, Moonshot Kimi K3 talks, and Lambda's $1B debt raise to lease GPUs to Microsoft all feed the 'AI monetization is real and Azure is the pipe' story within the last 72 hours.
m55
Momentum and prior beat-and-raise still in the tape
+14% in a month, +15.6% earnings-day move on July 30, Azure beat and $50B capex commitment - recent price action confirms the story is being bought, not sold.
Headwinds 2
m40
'Run ahead of the payoff' chatter emerging
Multiple pieces this week ('Take Profits or Buy More', 'Run Ahead Of Its AI Payoff') plus Morgan Stanley's Aug 17 hyperscaler credit-risk note show a valuation-fatigue crosscurrent, but it is commentary, not a broken narrative.
m35
Rates and market PE are a background press
10y at 4.67% and market PE 26 create a mild discount-rate headwind for premium-multiple names, but MSFT's profitability and defensiveness mute this vs unprofitable AI peers.
Net tailwind, and it is stock-specific: a durable platform-monopoly AI narrative is running hot, the risk-on tape is funneling flow into exactly this mega-cap cohort, and recent news (OpenAI revenue disclosure, Moonshot, Lambda GPU deals) keeps reinforcing the bull frame. The only real counterpressure is early 'has it run too far' commentary and the Morgan Stanley hyperscaler-credit note - real but not narrative-breaking. I lean tailwind, not strong tailwind, because the valuation-fatigue chatter is starting to accumulate and rates are a persistent background drag on premium multiples.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Whether hyperscaler credit-risk narrative (Morgan Stanley Aug 17) gains traction and re-rates the AI capex trade
  • Any crack in Azure growth or Copilot attach numbers on next print - the story lives or dies here
  • Rotation out of mega-cap into small caps or cyclicals - would drain the flow tailwind
  • VIX regime change or a 10y push above 4.8-5% that pressures long-duration multiples
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
Growth Outlook
+7
Growing
edge √Σ 130 · risk √Σ 124 · conf 8/10

The world is rebuilding its compute base for AI, and the spend is flowing to the three hyperscalers that own both the silicon relationships and the enterprise contracts. Microsoft sits at the intersection: it monetizes the AI cycle twice — once as raw Azure capacity and again as attach revenue on a productivity base that nearly every large organization already licenses. That dual position is why it outgrows its own category. The offsetting change is that this growth is now capital-intensive in a way software never was: FCF is shrinking while earnings rise, converting Microsoft partway into an infrastructure business whose returns depend on utilization of depreciating assets. Rates at 4.67% raise the cost of that buildout. The business direction is solidly up; the question the world has already answered too generously is how steep.

Growth drivers 5
m77
Azure + AI infrastructure capacity
Cloud remains the dominant growth engine; management has consistently framed demand as capacity-constrained rather than demand-constrained, meaning revenue converts as datacenter capex lands. That converts capex into a visible revenue backlog rather than a hope.
m66
Share gain vs category
Recent YoY 17.8% against industry ~10.1% — a +7.7pp gap. Microsoft is not merely riding the infrastructure-software tide; it is compounding faster than it, sustained across multiple years (16.4% revenue CAGR).
m59
Earnings leverage above revenue
Earnings YoY 31.3% vs revenue 17.8%, and 23.2% earnings CAGR vs 16.4% revenue CAGR. Mix shift toward high-margin cloud/subscription plus industry-wide margin expansion (+2.3pp operating) is compounding EPS faster than the top line.
m43
Attach-rate monetization of installed base
Copilot/E5/security seats are price-and-attach uplifts on an already-contracted enterprise base rather than new-logo hunting — a lower-friction growth mechanism than winning greenfield workloads.
m37
Estimate-beat consistency
Five consecutive EPS beats (+5% to +13%), suggesting either conservative guidance practice or genuine under-modeling of cloud mix — either way the near-term print distribution skews upward.
Growth risks 5
m83
Price-implied growth is unreachable
Reverse-DCF demands +54.1% against a house projection of 20.7% and a measured record near 16-18%. Nothing in the business's mechanics — not Azure, not Copilot attach — plausibly triples the trend rate. The structural rung is a growth business against an expectation it cannot meet.
m51
Decelerating quarterly trend
Revenue confidence flags the quarterly trend as decelerating even while the annual number is strong. Law-of-large-numbers on a ~$300B revenue base means each incremental point of growth requires a larger absolute win.
m59
Capex-driven FCF erosion
FCF CAGR is -4.9% while earnings CAGR is +23.2%. AI datacenter buildout is consuming the cash that growth used to generate; depreciation on that capex becomes a rising drag on reported margins in years 2-3 if AI revenue lands slower than the assets.
m42
AI monetization ambiguity
Copilot seat revenue and inference-margin economics are not separately disclosed, so the market cannot distinguish durable revenue from pull-forward compute. Model-layer commoditization and hyperscaler price competition could compress the take rate on the AI layer.
m24
Macro headwind on enterprise IT budgets
10y at 4.67 and a flagged macro-headwind regime pressures discretionary seat expansion and new-project spend; renewals hold but optimization cycles trim consumption growth.
vs expectations: ~6m above · 1y inline · 2-3y below
The forward growth verdict — is the business itself likely to grow (next 2 quarters / year 1 / years 2–3), judged against its category and against printed expectations. The full horizon ladder + creme renders on the Growth Outlook card above. Not a call on the price (Valuation owns that) or the tape (Sentiment owns that).
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), and Growth Outlook (the forward growth verdict). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Price Prediction
About flat -3.6% v0.6.0 View full prediction →

When we made this prediction on Aug 29, 2026, MSFT was $513.53. We expect it to be $495.00 by Mar 2027, and we consider it great value under $380.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 29, 2026.

Price when predicted$513.53
Our estimate for Mar 2027$495.00-3.6%
Great value below$380.00
Price history shown (6 Months)

Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.

Post-Report Due Diligence NOTES
The report is written. This is what its valuation stands on.
Analyzed Sep 22, 2026 · 02:02 today
Read epv-floor ext-gem-composite anchored-pe · FY income statement, balance sheet
1 finding · $0, re-derived on each view

Evidence for a closer look, not a verdict — no score or designation on this page has been changed by it. Items marked material are ones where a conclusion above moves to the other side of the price.

anchored-pe — the "fair value below price" reading turns on 2 inputs NOTE found by sensitivity, not by rule
Published $455.54 vs price $513.53. Nudging `trailing_eps` (up 25%), `adjusted_pe` (up 25%) moves the fair value to the other side of the price. This does not say those inputs are wrong — it says they are where to look first.
trailing_eps flips up 25% adjusted_pe flips up 25%
Price at analysis $513.53. This is where an investigation should start — it is not where one ends. Nothing here was checked against the filings, the tape, or the news; that is the investigator's job.
Community AI Feedback 1 review
MSFT&#039;s fair value can&#039;t be assessed without a view on AI capex ROI — and the current framework has no signal that measures it. The single most valuable thing to build is a Capex Efficiency / Reinvestment ROIC signal, because for any company at MSFT&#039;s scale and reinvestment intensity, that signal alone determines whether the verdict is undervalued or overvalued. Everything else is rounding error.
I&#039;d call MSFT slight_upside at $415, fair value ~$460, confidence moderate. The de-rating from $555 to $356-$415 over nine months has done most of the work — the market has already priced in meaningful skepticism about the $190B 2026 AI capex bet. At ~24.7x TTM P/E with 18%…
Slight Upside Fair Value: $460.00 Moderate confidence
My Notes personal — only you see this
v1.1.650 · 4f7fc509 · 2026-09-22 11:39:35