Tres candidatos valiosos: evaluación de Trade Desk, Adobe y PayPal para el año 2026

The market's verdict on these three stocks is clear: they are cheap. But the question for a disciplined investor is whether that cheapness is a margin of safety or a value trap. Each company trades at a significant discount to its own history and to the broader market, yet the reasons for their low multiples tell a different story. The task is to separate temporary setbacks from permanent damage.

For The Trade Desk, the cheapness stems from a self-inflicted wound. The company's aggressive rollout of its AI-powered ad-buying platform, Kokai, reportedly caused some customers to leave and others to scale back, disrupting its growth trajectory. This misstep, compounded by Amazon's encroachment into advertising, has left the stock down more than 70% from its peak. Yet the financial reality is one of resilience. The company still commands a gross margin of 78.81% and posted 18% year-over-year revenue growth last quarter. Its forward P/E of 18.5 times is a discount to the S&P 500's 22.1, but the growth rate suggests the market is punishing a tactical error more than a fundamental decline. The value case hinges on management's ability to fix Kokai and defend its core position.

Adobe's discount is a classic case of a narrative run amok. The stock fell about 35% last year on fears that generative AI would render its creative software obsolete. The financials, however, tell a story of consistent strength. Adobe posted solid revenue growth of 10% for fiscal 2025, with its digital media segment growing 11%. The company is actively leaning into AI with its Firefly model and other tools, noting that generative AI credit consumption has increased threefold quarter over quarter. Its forward P/E is not explicitly cited, but its projected annual recurring revenue (ARR) growth of 10.2% for next year points to a business that is not only surviving disruption but adapting to it. The cheapness here is a mispricing of a durable moat.

PayPal's valuation is the most extreme, trading at a forward P/E of 11.92. This reflects a long-term shift in the payments landscape, where the company has struggled to gain traction in newer digital wallets and faces intense competition. The stock's forward P/E has been in a steady decline, hitting a low of 10.88 last year. Yet the company remains a cash-generating machine. Its forward P/E is a fraction of what it was just a few years ago, suggesting the market has priced in a prolonged period of stagnation. The counterpoint is that a company with such a low multiple, especially one that has historically been a leader, may be offering a deep discount to its intrinsic value if it can stabilize and find a new growth path.

The bottom line is that cheapness is not the investment thesis. It is the starting point. For each of these companies, the reason for the low multiple must be scrutinized against the backdrop of their financial strength and competitive position. The Trade Desk's cheapness is due to a product misstep; Adobe's, a fear narrative; PayPal's, a structural shift. Only by weighing these factors can an investor determine if the price represents a bargain or a warning.

Assessing the Moat and Financial Health

The core of any value investment is the durability of the business model and the strength of its financials. A wide moat provides a long-term advantage, while robust financial metrics create a buffer against setbacks. Let's examine each company through this lens.

For The Trade Desk, the moat is built on its platform's scale and efficiency in the digital advertising ecosystem. It acts as a critical intermediary, connecting advertisers with premium inventory. The financial health is impressive, with a gross margin of 78.81% that demonstrates pricing power and operational leverage. This is supported by solid revenue growth, with an 18% year-over-year increase last quarter and a projected 16% growth for 2026. The threat to this moat is twofold: the self-inflicted wound from its Kokai platform rollout and the formidable competition from Amazon, which leverages its superior consumer shopping data. The financial metrics, however, suggest a resilient core. Even after the disruption, the company is still growing and maintaining exceptional profitability. The low forward P/E of 18.5 times, a discount to the market, implies the market is pricing in a significant risk of moat erosion. The margin of safety here depends on management's ability to repair the Kokai damage and defend its platform position against Amazon's encroachment.

Adobe's moat is its entrenched ecosystem of creative software, which has become a near-industry standard. The financials show a business that is not just surviving but adapting. The company posted solid revenue growth of 10% for fiscal 2025, with its core digital media segment growing 11%. More importantly, its projected annual recurring revenue (ARR) growth of 10.2% for next year signals continued customer stickiness. The company is actively investing in AI, noting that generative AI credit consumption has increased threefold quarter over quarter, which could drive higher-tier upgrades. The threat to the moat is the narrative of AI disruption, but the financial results contradict it. The stock's 35% drop last year was a classic case of a fear-driven sell-off, not a reflection of deteriorating fundamentals. The financial metrics-consistent growth, high profitability, and a healthy ARR pipeline-suggest a wide moat that is being temporarily undervalued. The forward P/E, while not explicitly cited, is implied to be reasonable given the growth trajectory, offering a margin of safety against the fear narrative.

PayPal's situation is the most challenging. Its moat, once its dominant position in online payments, has been eroding due to competition from newer digital wallets and a shift in consumer behavior. The financial health, however, remains a cash-generating machine. The extreme valuation, with a forward P/E of 11.92, reflects a market pricing in prolonged stagnation. The key financial metric that supports a margin of safety is the sheer cash flow generation implied by that low multiple. A company trading at such a discount to its own history and the market is likely being punished for a structural shift, not a temporary setback. The threat to the moat is ongoing, with the forward P/E having hit a low of 10.88 last year. Yet, the financial buffer is evident in its ability to generate substantial earnings at a minimal price. For a value investor, this presents a stark trade-off: a narrow, shrinking moat priced for a long decline, versus a valuation that offers a deep discount to any future cash flows the business can produce. The margin of safety is high, but it depends entirely on the company's ability to stabilize and find a new growth path.

The bottom line is that each company offers a different risk-reward profile. The Trade Desk has a strong moat and financials, but faces a tactical and competitive threat. Adobe's moat is intact, and its financials are robust, with the threat being a fear narrative. PayPal's moat is under pressure, but its financials and valuation offer a deep discount. The margin of safety is most apparent in the low multiples, but it must be weighed against the durability of the underlying business model.

Catalysts, Risks, and What to Watch

For patient investors, the path forward is clear: monitor specific, observable outcomes that will confirm or challenge the recovery thesis. The catalysts are the signals that the market's pessimism is unwarranted; the risks are the events that would validate it.

For The Trade Desk, the key catalyst is a measurable stabilization and growth rebound from its Kokai platform. Management's active work to fix the rollout is the first step, but the market needs to see it translate into customer retention and usage. The primary risk is that Amazon's superior consumer data continues to erode The Trade Desk's market share, turning a tactical misstep into a structural decline. Investors should watch for consecutive quarters of revenue growth at or above the projected 16% for 2026, alongside any improvement in customer concentration metrics or platform engagement data.

Adobe's catalyst is a shift in market sentiment away from the AI disruption narrative. The company is actively integrating AI tools like Firefly and GenStudio, and the threefold quarterly surge in generative AI credit consumption suggests customers are engaging with these features. The primary risk is that the fear narrative persists, keeping the stock depressed even as fundamentals hold up. The actionable signal to watch is Adobe's ability to consistently meet or exceed its projected 10.2% ARR growth for fiscal 2026, demonstrating that AI is a growth enabler, not a threat. A breakout would likely require the stock to reclaim its 52-week high, but the financials provide a margin of safety regardless.

PayPal's catalyst is stabilization in its core business, evidenced by a halt to the relentless decline in its forward P/E. The stock's extreme valuation of 11.92 times forward earnings implies a market pricing in permanent stagnation. The primary risk is that competition from newer digital wallets accelerates, further eroding its moat and justifying the low multiple. The most critical metric to watch is whether PayPal can achieve even modest growth in its total payment volume or transaction count, signaling it has found a floor. Given its low multiple, even a stabilization of earnings could eventually drive a re-rating, but patience is required.

The bottom line is that each company presents a different test. The Trade Desk must prove it can fix its own platform and defend its position. Adobe must prove its AI integration is driving customer value and growth. PayPal must prove its business has found a stable base. For the value investor, the watchlist is clear.