Honeywell International vs L3Harris Technologies
HON and LHX side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HON and LHX compare
Honeywell International is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as L3Harris Technologies ($69.2B against $51.7B).
On earnings, Honeywell International is cheaper: it trades at 8.5× trailing earnings, against 25.9× for L3Harris Technologies.
L3Harris Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (5.3% versus 5.0% for Honeywell International).
Honeywell International keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 21.6% compared with 5.2% at L3Harris Technologies.
Both pay dividends: Honeywell International yields 2.0% and L3Harris Technologies 1.8%.
L3Harris Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 16 for Honeywell International), 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 | HON | LHX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $69.2B | $51.7B |
| Share price | $218.33 | $277.61 |
| Change, 1 year | 2.6% | −3.2% |
| Change, 5 years | −3.4% | 23.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.73 | 0.63 |
| Employees | 101K | 45K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 8.5× (better) | 25.9× |
| P/S | 1.8× | 1.3× (better) |
| P/B | 3.7× | 2.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.3× (better) | 11.2× |
| P/FCF | 17.3× | 14.2× (better) |
| PEG | 20.62 | 1.64 (better) |
| FCF yield | 5.8% | 7.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $419.97 | $363.22 |
| Margin of safety | 48.0% (better) | 23.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.0% | 5.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.8% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 43.7% (better) | 16.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 46.6% (better) | 15.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.8% (better) | 1.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 36.5% (better) | 25.6% |
| Operating margin | 20.7% (better) | 10.6% |
| Net margin | 21.6% (better) | 5.2% |
| FCF margin | 10.5% (better) | 9.2% |
| Return on equity | 47.4% (better) | 10.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 14.8% (better) | 12.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.83 | 0.54 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.71 | 1.49 (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.21 (better) | 1.20 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.63 | 2.80 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% (better) | 1.8% |
| Payout ratio | 37.4% | 45.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 15 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.8% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.7% (better) | 1.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.7% (better) | 3.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 76.9% | 87.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.07% | 0.32% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$10.7M (better) | −$11.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.5% | 2.4% |
Go deeper
- HON stock overview
- HON income statement
- HON 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.