Garmin vs Northrop Grumman
GRMN and NOC 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 NOC compare
Northrop Grumman is the larger company, worth 1.5 times as much as Garmin ($79.2B against $52.6B).
On earnings, Northrop Grumman is cheaper: it trades at 17.7× trailing earnings, against 28.1× for Garmin.
Garmin grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.5% versus 5.9% for Northrop Grumman).
Garmin keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 24.5% compared with 10.5% at Northrop Grumman.
Both pay dividends: Garmin yields 1.4% and Northrop Grumman 1.7%.
Garmin scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 18 for Northrop Grumman), 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 | NOC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $52.6B | $79.2B |
| Share price | $272.67 | $557.54 |
| Change, 1 year | 24.2% | −4.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 91.8% | 53.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.97 | 0.29 |
| Employees | 6,500 | 95K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 22 (better) | 18 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 6 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 28.1× | 17.7× (better) |
| P/S | 6.9× | 1.8× (better) |
| P/B | 5.8× | 4.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 23.6× | 15.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | 32.9× | 21.7× (better) |
| PEG | 1.45 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.0% | 4.6% (better) |
| Fair value | $247.45 | $647.15 |
| Margin of safety | −10.2% | 13.8% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.5% (better) | 5.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.6% (better) | 2.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 19.7% (better) | 14.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 19.8% (better) | 16.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 10.7% (better) | 8.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 60.1% | – |
| Operating margin | 27.6% (better) | 10.7% |
| Net margin | 24.5% (better) | 10.5% |
| FCF margin | 20.9% (better) | 8.5% |
| Return on equity | 21.9% | 27.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 29.5% (better) | 13.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.85 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.10 |
| Current ratio | 3.03 (better) | 1.17 |
| Altman Z-score | 15.77 (better) | 3.13 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.4% | 1.7% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 38.5% | 29.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 9.7% |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.0% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.4% | 2.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 57.1% | 83.5% |
| Held by insiders | 17.4% | 0.22% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$20.0M (better) | −$26.4M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.1% | 1.6% |
Go deeper
- GRMN stock overview
- GRMN income statement
- GRMN valuation and score
- NOC stock overview
- NOC income statement
- NOC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.