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 1.9 times as much as Lockheed Martin ($268B against $140B).
On earnings, Lockheed Martin is cheaper: it trades at 21.5× trailing earnings, against 32.2× for RTX.
RTX grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (11.6% versus 7.9% for Lockheed Martin).
RTX keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.8% compared with 8.2% at Lockheed Martin.
Both pay dividends: Lockheed Martin yields 2.3% and RTX 1.4%.
Lockheed Martin scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 12 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 | $140B | $268B |
| Share price | $604.09 | $198.36 |
| Change, 1 year | 32.2% | 10.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 76.9% | 132% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.35 | 0.62 |
| Employees | 110K | 180K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.5× (better) | 32.2× |
| P/S | 1.8× (better) | 2.8× |
| P/B | 13.9× | 3.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.0× (better) | 18.9× |
| P/FCF | 16.7× (better) | 28.2× |
| PEG | – | 2.61 |
| FCF yield | 6.0% (better) | 3.5% |
| Fair value | $548.95 | $164.29 |
| Margin of safety | −10.0% (better) | −20.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.9% | 11.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 2.8% | 9.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 55.1% (better) | 27.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 57.2% (better) | 26.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −2.4% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 11.7% | – |
| Operating margin | 11.8% (better) | 11.8% |
| Net margin | 8.2% | 8.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 10.6% (better) | 9.9% |
| Return on equity | 80.2% (better) | 12.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 32.0% (better) | 9.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.04 | 0.54 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.32 (better) | 1.75 |
| Interest coverage | 8.6× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.26 (better) | 1.05 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.73 (better) | 2.78 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% (better) | 1.4% |
| Payout ratio | 49.2% | 45.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 6.4% (better) | 4.3% |
| Buyback yield | 0.54% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.8% (better) | 1.4% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 75.6% | 80.2% |
| Held by insiders | 0.07% | 0.07% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$124K (better) | −$41.4M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.3% | 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.