LEA vs ALV

For growth investors, Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) is the stronger pick with 4. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 2% for Lear Corporation (LEA). Autoliv, Inc. (ALV) offers the better valuation at 12. 7x trailing P/E (11. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lear Corporation (LEA) a "Hold" — based on 31 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) is the cheapest at 12. 7x versus Lear Corporation at 16. 9x. On forward P/E, Lear Corporation is actually cheaper at 9. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Autoliv, Inc. wins at 0. 33x versus Lear Corporation's 0. 37x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) delivered a total return of +31. 5%, compared to -20. 8% for Lear Corporation (LEA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ALV returned +59. 4% versus LEA's +41. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 09β versus Lear Corporation's 1. 14β — meaning LEA is approximately 4% more volatile than ALV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lear Corporation (LEA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 79% versus 95% for Autoliv, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) is pulling ahead at 4. 1% versus -0. 2% for Lear Corporation (LEA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Autoliv, Inc. grew EPS 19. 1% year-over-year, compared to -9. 1% for Lear Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, ALV leads at 6. 9% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 8% net margin versus 1. 9% for Lear Corporation — meaning it keeps 6. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ALV leads at 10. 1% versus 4. 4% for LEA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ALV leads at 19. 2%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Autoliv, Inc. (ALV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 33x versus Lear Corporation's 0. 37x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Lear Corporation (LEA) trades at 9. 5x forward P/E versus 11. 6x for Autoliv, Inc. — 2. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ALV: 11. 0% to $134. 63.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Autoliv, Inc. (ALV) offers the highest yield at 2. 6%, versus 2. 2% for Lear Corporation (LEA).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 09), 2. 6% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ALV: +59. 4%, LEA: +41. 0%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Consumer Cyclical sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.