Boeing vs General Dynamics
BA and GD side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BA and GD compare
Boeing is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as General Dynamics ($136B against $101B).
On earnings, General Dynamics is cheaper: it trades at 21.9× trailing earnings, against 68.1× for Boeing.
Boeing grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.8% versus 9.7% for General Dynamics).
General Dynamics keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.2% compared with 2.6% at Boeing.
General Dynamics pays a dividend yielding 1.7%; Boeing does not pay one.
General Dynamics scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 7 for Boeing), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BA | GD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $136B | $101B |
| Share price | $171.55 | $372.59 |
| Change, 1 year | −19.7% | 8.5% |
| Change, 5 years | −23.6% | 85.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.25 | 0.57 |
| Employees | 72K | 40K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 68.1× | 21.9× (better) |
| P/S | 1.4× (better) | 1.8× |
| P/B | 22.2× | 3.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 23.8× | 15.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 17.4× |
| PEG | – | 2.67 |
| FCF yield | −0.15% | 5.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $104.56 | $311.28 |
| Margin of safety | −64.1% | −19.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 24.8% (better) | 9.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.0% (better) | 6.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 10.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 10.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 7.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 4.7% | – |
| Operating margin | 4.9% | 10.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 2.6% | 8.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | −0.22% | 10.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 174% (better) | 18.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 13.7% | 16.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 7.52 | 0.26 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.81 | 0.39 (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.14 | 1.43 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.42 | 4.33 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.7% |
| Payout ratio | 14.2% | 35.8% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.64% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 2.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 75.7% | 86.6% |
| Held by insiders | 0.08% | 9.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.4M (better) | −$95.2M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.9% | 0.89% |
Go deeper
- BA stock overview
- BA income statement
- BA valuation and score
- GD stock overview
- GD income statement
- GD valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.