Garmin vs L3Harris Technologies
GRMN 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 GRMN and LHX compare
Garmin and L3Harris Technologies are about the same size, with market caps of $52.6B and $51.7B.
On earnings, L3Harris Technologies is cheaper: it trades at 25.9× trailing earnings, against 28.1× for Garmin.
Garmin grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.5% versus 5.3% for L3Harris Technologies).
Garmin keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 24.5% compared with 5.2% at L3Harris Technologies.
Both pay dividends: Garmin yields 1.4% and L3Harris Technologies 1.8%.
Garmin scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 19 for L3Harris Technologies), 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 | GRMN | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $52.6B | $51.7B |
| Share price | $272.67 | $277.61 |
| Change, 1 year | 24.2% | −3.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 91.8% | 23.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.97 | 0.63 |
| Employees | 6,500 | 45K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 22 (better) | 19 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 28.1× | 25.9× (better) |
| P/S | 6.9× | 1.3× (better) |
| P/B | 5.8× | 2.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 23.6× | 11.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | 32.9× | 14.2× (better) |
| PEG | 1.45 (better) | 1.64 |
| FCF yield | 3.0% | 7.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $247.45 | $363.22 |
| Margin of safety | −10.2% | 23.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.5% (better) | 5.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.6% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 19.7% (better) | 16.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 19.8% (better) | 15.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 10.7% (better) | 1.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 60.1% (better) | 25.6% |
| Operating margin | 27.6% (better) | 10.6% |
| Net margin | 24.5% (better) | 5.2% |
| FCF margin | 20.9% (better) | 9.2% |
| Return on equity | 21.9% (better) | 10.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 29.5% (better) | 12.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.54 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 1.49 |
| Current ratio | 3.03 (better) | 1.20 |
| Altman Z-score | 15.77 (better) | 2.80 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.4% | 1.8% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 38.5% | 45.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 4 |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.4% | 3.2% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 57.1% | 87.9% |
| Held by insiders | 17.4% | 0.32% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$20.0M | −$11.8M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.1% | 2.4% |
Go deeper
- GRMN stock overview
- GRMN income statement
- GRMN 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.