Leonardo DRS vs Garmin
DRS and GRMN side by side, both in measuring, analyzing, and controlling instruments; photographic, medical and optical goods; watches and clocks. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How DRS and GRMN compare
Garmin is the larger company, worth 5.2 times as much as Leonardo DRS ($52.6B against $10.1B).
On earnings, Garmin is cheaper: it trades at 28.1× trailing earnings, against 31.7× for Leonardo DRS.
Garmin grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.5% versus 10.5% for Leonardo DRS).
Garmin keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 24.5% compared with 8.5% at Leonardo DRS.
Both pay dividends: Leonardo DRS yields 0.96% and Garmin 1.4%.
Garmin scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 16 for Leonardo DRS), 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 | DRS | GRMN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $10.1B | $52.6B |
| Share price | $37.68 | $272.67 |
| Change, 1 year | −2.0% | 24.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 257% | 91.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.80 | 0.97 |
| Employees | 7,300 | 6,500 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 | 22 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 31.7× | 28.1× (better) |
| P/S | 2.7× (better) | 6.9× |
| P/B | 3.6× (better) | 5.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 20.1× (better) | 23.6× |
| P/FCF | 27.7× (better) | 32.9× |
| PEG | – | 1.45 |
| FCF yield | 3.6% (better) | 3.0% |
| Fair value | $37.78 | $247.45 |
| Margin of safety | 0.26% (better) | −10.2% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.5% | 13.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.6% | 11.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 28.8% (better) | 19.7% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 28.0% (better) | 19.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 20.8% (better) | 10.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 24.9% | 60.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 10.5% | 27.6% (better) |
| Net margin | 8.5% | 24.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 9.6% | 20.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 11.9% | 21.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 12.3% | 29.5% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.05 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.24 | – |
| Current ratio | 1.92 | 3.03 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.10 | 15.77 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.96% | 1.4% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 38.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.26% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.2% | 1.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 26.6% | 57.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.32% | 17.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.1M (better) | −$20.0M |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.2% | 2.1% |
Go deeper
- DRS stock overview
- DRS income statement
- DRS valuation and score
- GRMN stock overview
- GRMN income statement
- GRMN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.