Aerospace & Defense
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
AVAV vs LHX vs RTX vs KTOS vs LMT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
AVAV vs LHX vs RTX vs KTOS vs LMT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Aerospace & Defense | Aerospace & Defense | Aerospace & Defense | Aerospace & Defense | Aerospace & Defense |
| Market Cap | $8.40B | $55.97B | $237.14B | $10.86B | $116.73B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.61B | $22.48B | $90.37B | $1.42B | $75.11B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-224M | $1.73B | $7.26B | $29M | $4.79B |
| Gross Margin | 21.8% | 24.5% | 20.2% | 18.3% | 9.8% |
| Operating Margin | -8.3% | 10.0% | 10.4% | 1.8% | 9.9% |
| Forward P/E | 58.4x | 25.8x | 25.4x | 76.4x | 16.9x |
| Total Debt | $64M | $10.44B | $39.51B | $180M | $21.70B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $41M | $1.07B | $7.43B | $561M | $4.12B |
AVAV vs LHX vs RTX vs KTOS vs LMT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| AeroVironment, Inc. (AVAV) | 100 | 237.6 | +137.6% |
| L3Harris Technologi… (LHX) | 100 | 150.2 | +50.2% |
| RTX Corporation (RTX) | 100 | 272.9 | +172.9% |
| Kratos Defense & Se… (KTOS) | 100 | 312.1 | +212.1% |
| Lockheed Martin Cor… (LMT) | 100 | 130.4 | +30.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AVAV vs LHX vs RTX vs KTOS vs LMT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AVAV lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
LHX is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.37, Low D/E 53.2%, current ratio 1.19x
RTX ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality.
- 8.0% margin vs AVAV's -13.9%
KTOS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 18.5%, EPS growth 18.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 14.5%
- 12.5% 10Y total return vs AVAV's 498.7%
- 18.5% revenue growth vs LHX's 2.5%
- +69.2% vs AVAV's -0.1%
LMT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 0.12, yield 2.7%
- Beta 0.12, yield 2.7%, current ratio 1.09x
- Lower P/E (16.9x vs 76.4x)
- Beta 0.12 vs KTOS's 1.87
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.5% revenue growth vs LHX's 2.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (16.9x vs 76.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.0% margin vs AVAV's -13.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.12 vs KTOS's 1.87 | |
| Dividends | 2.7% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs LHX's 1.6%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +69.2% vs AVAV's -0.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.0% ROA vs AVAV's -5.0%, ROIC 23.9% vs 3.6% |
AVAV vs LHX vs RTX vs KTOS vs LMT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
AVAV vs LHX vs RTX vs KTOS vs LMT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LMT leads in 3 of 6 categories
KTOS leads 1 • AVAV leads 0 • LHX leads 0 • RTX leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — LHX and RTX each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RTX is the larger business by revenue, generating $90.4B annually — 63.9x KTOS's $1.4B. RTX is the more profitable business, keeping 8.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AVAV's -13.9%. On growth, AVAV holds the edge at +143.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.6B | $22.5B | $90.4B | $1.4B | $75.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $82M | $3.3B | $13.8B | $72M | $8.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$224M | $1.7B | $7.3B | $29M | $4.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$183M | $2.6B | $8.4B | -$134M | $5.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.8% | +24.5% | +20.2% | +18.3% | +9.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -8.3% | +10.0% | +10.4% | +1.8% | +9.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.9% | +7.7% | +8.0% | +2.1% | +6.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -11.3% | +11.5% | +9.2% | -9.5% | +7.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +143.4% | +11.9% | +8.7% | +22.6% | +0.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -51.5% | +33.3% | +32.5% | +133.3% | -11.5% |
Valuation Metrics
LMT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 23.6x trailing earnings, LMT trades at a 95% valuation discount to KTOS's 445.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, LMT's 15.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KTOS's 120.4x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $8.4B | $56.0B | $237.1B | $10.9B | $116.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $8.4B | $65.3B | $269.2B | $10.5B | $134.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 108.57x | 35.13x | 35.50x | 445.31x | 23.57x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 58.45x | 25.78x | 25.42x | 76.41x | 16.92x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 3.35x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 103.03x | 19.11x | 20.89x | 120.40x | 15.90x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.24x | 2.56x | 2.68x | 8.06x | 1.56x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.35x | 2.88x | 3.56x | 5.02x | 17.48x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 20.87x | 29.87x | — | 16.90x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LMT leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LMT delivers a 74.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $75 in annual profit, vs $-6 for AVAV. AVAV carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LMT's 3.23x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LHX scores 9/9 vs AVAV's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -6.4% | +8.9% | +10.9% | +1.3% | +74.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.0% | +4.2% | +4.3% | +1.0% | +8.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.6% | +5.4% | +6.7% | +1.4% | +23.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.5% | +6.4% | +7.9% | +1.5% | +21.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 9 | 8 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.07x | 0.53x | 0.59x | 0.09x | 3.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $23M | $9.4B | $32.1B | -$381M | $17.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $41M | $1.1B | $7.4B | $561M | $4.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $64M | $10.4B | $39.5B | $180M | $21.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -5.99x | 4.41x | 5.58x | 6.16x | 6.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KTOS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KTOS five years ago would be worth $22,499 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,438 for LMT. Over the past 12 months, KTOS leads with a +69.2% total return vs AVAV's -0.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KTOS at 63.6% vs LMT's 6.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -34.3% | -1.2% | -5.6% | -27.0% | +2.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -0.1% | +39.4% | +39.0% | +69.2% | +9.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +63.2% | +67.5% | +92.3% | +338.2% | +20.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +63.2% | +48.6% | +121.0% | +125.0% | +44.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +498.7% | +344.0% | +233.5% | +1252.6% | +153.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +17.7% | +18.8% | +24.3% | +63.6% | +6.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — RTX and LMT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LMT is the less volatile stock with a 0.12 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KTOS's 1.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RTX currently trades 82.1% from its 52-week high vs AVAV's 40.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.55x | 0.37x | 0.50x | 1.87x | 0.12x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $417.86 | $379.23 | $214.50 | $134.00 | $692.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $159.64 | $214.10 | $126.03 | $32.85 | $410.11 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +40.3% | +79.0% | +82.1% | +43.2% | +73.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.3 | 23.8 | 37.4 | 33.8 | 27.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.7M | 1.4M | 5.3M | 4.4M | 1.5M |
Analyst Outlook
LMT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AVAV as "Buy", LHX as "Buy", RTX as "Buy", KTOS as "Buy", LMT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 104.2% upside for AVAV (target: $344) vs 17.6% for LHX (target: $352). For income investors, LMT offers the higher dividend yield at 2.67% vs RTX's 1.50%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $343.60 | $352.25 | $224.89 | $109.58 | $635.11 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 28 | 32 | 26 | 24 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.6% | +1.5% | — | +2.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 6 | 4 | — | 23 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $4.79 | $2.63 | — | $13.50 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.1% | +0.0% | 0.0% | +2.6% |
LMT leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). KTOS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
AVAV vs LHX vs RTX vs KTOS vs LMT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc.
(KTOS) is the stronger pick with 18. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 5% for L3Harris Technologies, Inc. (LHX). Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) offers the better valuation at 23. 6x trailing P/E (16. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate AeroVironment, Inc. (AVAV) a "Buy" — based on 28 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.
02Which has the better valuation — AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT?
On trailing P/E, Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) is the cheapest at 23.
6x versus Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc. at 445. 3x. On forward P/E, Lockheed Martin Corporation is actually cheaper at 16. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT?
Over the past 5 years, Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc.
(KTOS) delivered a total return of +125. 0%, compared to +44. 4% for Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KTOS returned +1253% versus LMT's +153. 7%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
12β versus Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc. 's 1. 87β — meaning KTOS is approximately 1506% more volatile than LMT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AeroVironment, Inc. (AVAV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 3% for Lockheed Martin Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc.
(KTOS) is pulling ahead at 18. 5% versus 2. 5% for L3Harris Technologies, Inc. (LHX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: RTX Corporation grew EPS 39. 7% year-over-year, compared to -28. 9% for AeroVironment, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AVAV leads at 22. 6% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT?
RTX Corporation (RTX) is the more profitable company, earning 7.
6% net margin versus 1. 6% for Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc. — meaning it keeps 7. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LMT leads at 10. 3% versus 2. 1% for KTOS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AVAV leads at 39. 4%, 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.
07Is AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) trades at 16.
9x forward P/E versus 76. 4x for Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc. — 59. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AVAV: 104. 2% to $343. 60.
08Which pays a better dividend — AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT?
In this comparison, LMT (2.
7% yield), LHX (1. 6% yield), RTX (1. 5% yield) pay a dividend. AVAV, KTOS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is AVAV or LHX or RTX or KTOS or LMT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
12), 2. 7% yield, +153. 7% 10Y return). AeroVironment, Inc. (AVAV) carries a higher beta of 1. 55 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LMT: +153. 7%, AVAV: +498. 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.
10What are the main differences between AVAV and LHX and RTX and KTOS and LMT?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: AVAV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LHX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; RTX is a large-cap quality compounder stock; KTOS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; LMT is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. LHX, RTX, LMT pay a dividend while AVAV, KTOS do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.