Honeywell International vs StandardAero
HON and SARO side by side, both in aircraft and parts. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HON and SARO compare
Honeywell International is the larger company, worth 8.9 times as much as StandardAero ($69.2B against $7.7B).
On earnings, Honeywell International is cheaper: it trades at 8.5× trailing earnings, against 24.1× for StandardAero.
StandardAero grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.6% 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 5.1% at StandardAero.
Honeywell International pays a dividend yielding 2.0%; StandardAero does not pay one.
Honeywell International scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 10 for StandardAero), 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 | SARO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $69.2B | $7.7B |
| Share price | $218.33 | $23.38 |
| Change, 1 year | 2.6% | −18.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −3.4% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.73 | 1.23 |
| Employees | 101K | 8,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 10 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 8.5× (better) | 24.1× |
| P/S | 1.8× | 1.2× (better) |
| P/B | 3.7× | 2.8× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.3× (better) | 12.5× |
| P/FCF | 17.3× (better) | 35.4× |
| PEG | 20.62 | – |
| FCF yield | 5.8% (better) | 2.8% |
| Fair value | $419.97 | $33.10 |
| Margin of safety | 48.0% (better) | 29.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.0% | 12.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.8% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 43.7% | 144% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 46.6% | 137% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 1.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 36.5% (better) | 15.0% |
| Operating margin | 20.7% (better) | 9.5% |
| Net margin | 21.6% (better) | 5.1% |
| FCF margin | 10.5% (better) | 3.5% |
| Return on equity | 47.4% (better) | 12.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 14.8% (better) | 9.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.83 | 0.84 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.71 (better) | 2.72 |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.21 | 2.13 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.63 (better) | 2.40 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% | – |
| Payout ratio | 37.4% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 15 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.8% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.7% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 3.7% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 76.9% | 109% |
| Held by insiders | 0.07% | – |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$10.7M (better) | −$2.5B |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.5% | – |
Go deeper
- HON stock overview
- HON income statement
- HON valuation and score
- SARO stock overview
- SARO income statement
- SARO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.