Leonardo DRS vs L3Harris Technologies
DRS and LHX 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 LHX compare
L3Harris Technologies is the larger company, worth 5.1 times as much as Leonardo DRS ($51.7B against $10.1B).
On earnings, L3Harris Technologies is cheaper: it trades at 25.9× trailing earnings, against 31.7× for Leonardo DRS.
Leonardo DRS grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.5% versus 5.3% for L3Harris Technologies).
Leonardo DRS keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.5% compared with 5.2% at L3Harris Technologies.
Both pay dividends: Leonardo DRS yields 0.96% and L3Harris Technologies 1.8%.
L3Harris Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (19 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 | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $10.1B | $51.7B |
| Share price | $37.68 | $277.61 |
| Change, 1 year | −2.0% | −3.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 257% | 23.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.80 | 0.63 |
| Employees | 7,300 | 45K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 31.7× | 25.9× (better) |
| P/S | 2.7× | 1.3× (better) |
| P/B | 3.6× | 2.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 20.1× | 11.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 27.7× | 14.2× (better) |
| PEG | – | 1.64 |
| FCF yield | 3.6% | 7.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $37.78 | $363.22 |
| Margin of safety | 0.26% | 23.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.5% (better) | 5.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.6% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 28.8% (better) | 16.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 28.0% (better) | 15.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 20.8% (better) | 1.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 24.9% | 25.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 10.5% | 10.6% (better) |
| Net margin | 8.5% (better) | 5.2% |
| FCF margin | 9.6% (better) | 9.2% |
| Return on equity | 11.9% (better) | 10.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.3% | 12.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.05 (better) | 0.54 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.24 | 1.49 (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.92 (better) | 1.20 |
| Altman Z-score | 5.10 (better) | 2.80 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.96% | 1.8% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 45.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Buyback yield | 0.26% | 1.5% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.2% | 3.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 26.6% | 87.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.32% | 0.32% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.1M (better) | −$11.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.2% | 2.4% |
Go deeper
- DRS stock overview
- DRS income statement
- DRS valuation and score
- LHX stock overview
- LHX income statement
- LHX valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.