Boeing vs Lockheed Martin
BA and LMT side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BA and LMT compare
Boeing and Lockheed Martin are about the same size, with market caps of $136B and $147B.
On earnings, Lockheed Martin is cheaper: it trades at 23.5× trailing earnings, against 68.1× for Boeing.
Boeing grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.8% versus 7.2% for Lockheed Martin).
Lockheed Martin keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.2% compared with 2.6% at Boeing.
Lockheed Martin pays a dividend yielding 2.2%; Boeing does not pay one.
Lockheed Martin scores higher on the StockData Score (15 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 | LMT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $136B | $147B |
| Share price | $171.55 | $636.95 |
| Change, 1 year | −19.7% | 31.2% |
| Change, 5 years | −23.6% | 87.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.25 | 0.33 |
| Employees | 72K | 110K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 68.1× | 23.5× (better) |
| P/S | 1.4× (better) | 1.9× |
| P/B | 22.2× | 16.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 23.8× | 17.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 16.8× |
| FCF yield | −0.15% | 5.9% (better) |
| Fair value | $104.56 | $480.46 |
| Margin of safety | −64.1% | −32.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 24.8% (better) | 7.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.0% (better) | 2.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 49.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 52.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −2.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 4.7% | 11.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 4.9% | 11.9% (better) |
| Net margin | 2.6% | 8.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | −0.22% | 11.3% (better) |
| Return on equity | 174% (better) | 89.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 13.7% | 30.3% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 7.52 | 2.34 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.81 | 1.83 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 8.2× |
| Current ratio | 1.14 | 1.19 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.42 | 3.80 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.2% |
| Payout ratio | 14.2% | 50.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 6.4% |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.2% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 3.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 75.7% | 75.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.08% | 0.07% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.4M | −$124K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.9% | 1.2% |
Go deeper
- BA stock overview
- BA income statement
- BA valuation and score
- LMT stock overview
- LMT income statement
- LMT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.