General Dynamics vs RTX
GD and RTX side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GD and RTX compare
RTX is the larger company, worth 2.7 times as much as General Dynamics ($269B against $101B).
On earnings, General Dynamics is cheaper: it trades at 21.9× trailing earnings, against 35.2× for RTX.
RTX grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (11.8% versus 9.7% for General Dynamics).
RTX keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.3% compared with 8.2% at General Dynamics.
Both pay dividends: General Dynamics yields 1.7% and RTX 1.4%.
General Dynamics scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 11 for RTX), 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 | GD | RTX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $101B | $269B |
| Share price | $372.59 | $199.80 |
| Change, 1 year | 8.5% | 13.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 85.4% | 119% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.57 | 0.61 |
| Employees | 40K | 180K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.9× (better) | 35.2× |
| P/S | 1.8× (better) | 2.9× |
| P/B | 3.7× (better) | 4.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.2× (better) | 20.1× |
| P/FCF | 17.4× (better) | 23.6× |
| PEG | 2.67 (better) | 2.85 |
| FCF yield | 5.7% (better) | 4.2% |
| Fair value | $311.28 | $165.81 |
| Margin of safety | −19.7% (better) | −20.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 9.7% | 11.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 6.7% | 9.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 10.5% | 25.9% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 10.2% | 24.8% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.0% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 10.4% | 11.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 8.2% | 8.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 10.2% | 12.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 18.0% (better) | 12.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 16.1% (better) | 8.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.26 (better) | 0.56 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.39 (better) | 1.91 |
| Current ratio | 1.43 (better) | 1.01 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.33 (better) | 2.73 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.7% (better) | 1.4% |
| Payout ratio | 35.8% | 48.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 4.3% |
| Buyback yield | 0.64% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.3% (better) | 1.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 86.6% | 80.3% |
| Held by insiders | 9.7% | 0.07% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$95.2M | −$39.5M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 0.89% | 1.0% |
Go deeper
- GD stock overview
- GD income statement
- GD valuation and score
- RTX stock overview
- RTX income statement
- RTX valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.