ALV vs BWA

For growth investors, Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) is the stronger pick with 4. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 7% for BorgWarner Inc. (BWA). 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 BorgWarner Inc. (BWA) a "Buy" — based on 38 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 BorgWarner Inc. at 47. 9x. On forward P/E, Autoliv, Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 6x.

Over the past 5 years, BorgWarner Inc.

(BWA) delivered a total return of +37. 6%, compared to +32. 8% for Autoliv, Inc. (ALV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BWA returned +124. 6% versus ALV's +60. 7%. 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), BorgWarner Inc.

(BWA) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 04β versus Autoliv, Inc. 's 1. 12β — meaning ALV is approximately 8% more volatile than BWA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, BorgWarner Inc. (BWA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 74% 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 1. 7% for BorgWarner Inc. (BWA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Autoliv, Inc. grew EPS 19. 1% year-over-year, compared to -14. 7% for BorgWarner Inc.. 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 BorgWarner Inc. — 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 9. 2% for BWA. 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.

On forward earnings alone, Autoliv, Inc.

(ALV) trades at 11. 6x forward P/E versus 11. 8x for BorgWarner Inc. — 0. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BWA: 13. 8% to $69. 80.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Autoliv, Inc. (ALV) offers the highest yield at 2. 5%, versus 0. 9% for BorgWarner Inc. (BWA).

For long-horizon retirement investors, BorgWarner Inc.

(BWA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 04), 0. 9% yield, +124. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (BWA: +124. 6%, ALV: +60. 7%), 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.

In terms of investment character: ALV is a small-cap deep-value stock; BWA is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. 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.