Lockheed Martin vs RTX
LMT and RTX side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How LMT and RTX compare
RTX is the larger company, worth 1.8 times as much as Lockheed Martin ($269B against $147B).
On earnings, Lockheed Martin is cheaper: it trades at 23.5× trailing earnings, against 35.2× for RTX.
RTX grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (11.8% versus 7.2% for Lockheed Martin).
RTX keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.3% compared with 8.2% at Lockheed Martin.
Both pay dividends: Lockheed Martin yields 2.2% and RTX 1.4%.
Lockheed Martin scores higher on the StockData Score (15 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 | LMT | RTX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $147B | $269B |
| Share price | $636.95 | $199.80 |
| Change, 1 year | 31.2% | 13.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 87.4% | 119% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.33 | 0.61 |
| Employees | 110K | 180K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.5× (better) | 35.2× |
| P/S | 1.9× (better) | 2.9× |
| P/B | 16.8× | 4.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.9× (better) | 20.1× |
| P/FCF | 16.8× (better) | 23.6× |
| PEG | – | 2.85 |
| FCF yield | 5.9% (better) | 4.2% |
| Fair value | $480.46 | $165.81 |
| Margin of safety | −32.6% | −20.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.2% | 11.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.8% | 9.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 49.5% (better) | 25.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 52.8% (better) | 24.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −2.4% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 11.8% | – |
| Operating margin | 11.9% (better) | 11.2% |
| Net margin | 8.2% | 8.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 11.3% | 12.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 89.2% (better) | 12.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 30.3% (better) | 8.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.34 | 0.56 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.83 (better) | 1.91 |
| Interest coverage | 8.2× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.19 (better) | 1.01 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.80 (better) | 2.73 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.2% (better) | 1.4% |
| Payout ratio | 50.5% | 48.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 6.4% (better) | 4.3% |
| Buyback yield | 1.2% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.4% (better) | 1.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 75.7% | 80.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.07% | 0.07% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$124K (better) | −$39.5M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.2% | 1.0% |
Go deeper
- LMT stock overview
- LMT income statement
- LMT 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.