Boeing vs General Dynamics
BA and GD side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BA and GD compare
Boeing is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as General Dynamics ($138B against $99.2B).
On earnings, Boeing is cheaper: it trades at 18.6× trailing earnings, against 21.6× for General Dynamics.
Boeing grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (17.5% versus 9.7% for General Dynamics).
General Dynamics keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.2% compared with 8.1% at Boeing.
General Dynamics pays a dividend yielding 1.7%; Boeing does not pay one.
General Dynamics scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 10 for Boeing), 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 | BA | GD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $138B | $99.2B |
| Share price | $174.54 | $367.22 |
| Change, 1 year | −10.4% | 5.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −18.5% | 87.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.26 | 0.58 |
| Employees | 72K | 40K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 18.6× (better) | 21.6× |
| P/S | 1.5× (better) | 1.8× |
| P/B | 21.1× | 3.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.6× (better) | 15.0× |
| P/FCF | 8645× | 17.2× (better) |
| PEG | – | 2.63 |
| FCF yield | 0.01% | 5.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $242.40 | $320.86 |
| Margin of safety | 28.0% (better) | −14.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 17.5% (better) | 9.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.0% (better) | 6.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 10.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 10.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 7.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 9.4% | – |
| Operating margin | 10.3% | 10.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 8.1% | 8.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | 0.02% | 10.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 18.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 35.3% (better) | 16.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 7.01 | 0.26 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.10 | 0.39 (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.13 | 1.43 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.49 | 4.31 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.7% |
| Payout ratio | 4.5% | 35.8% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.65% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 2.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 75.5% | 86.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.08% | 9.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.7M (better) | −$116M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.2% | 0.94% |
Go deeper
- BA stock overview
- BA income statement
- BA valuation and score
- GD stock overview
- GD income statement
- GD valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.