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 1.4 times as much as Garmin ($78.2B against $54.5B).
On earnings, Northrop Grumman is cheaper: it trades at 17.4× trailing earnings, against 27.2× for Garmin.
Garmin grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.6% versus 6.5% for Northrop Grumman).
Garmin keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 25.6% compared with 10.4% 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 | $54.5B | $78.2B |
| Share price | $283.03 | $550.43 |
| Change, 1 year | 42.5% | −1.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 98.2% | 55.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.96 | 0.31 |
| 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 | 27.2× | 17.4× (better) |
| P/S | 6.9× | 1.8× (better) |
| P/B | 5.7× | 4.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 23.0× | 14.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 37.2× | 20.4× (better) |
| PEG | 1.40 | – |
| FCF yield | 2.7% | 4.9% (better) |
| Fair value | $255.38 | $625.70 |
| Margin of safety | −10.8% | 12.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.6% (better) | 6.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.6% (better) | 2.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 28.4% (better) | 12.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 28.5% (better) | 14.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 10.7% (better) | 8.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 61.1% | – |
| Operating margin | 28.8% (better) | 10.6% |
| Net margin | 25.6% (better) | 10.4% |
| FCF margin | 18.6% (better) | 8.8% |
| Return on equity | 22.4% | 26.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 28.8% (better) | 13.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.81 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 1.86 |
| Current ratio | 3.05 (better) | 1.23 |
| Altman Z-score | 16.00 (better) | 3.08 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.4% | 1.7% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 37.2% | 30.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 9.7% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.67% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.4% | 2.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 57.1% | 83.5% |
| Held by insiders | 17.9% | 0.22% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$20.0M (better) | −$26.4M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.0% | 1.5% |
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.