Aerospace & Defense
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
EMBJ vs TXT vs BA vs GD vs RTX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
EMBJ vs TXT vs BA vs GD vs RTX — 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 | $10.98B | $15.81B | $186.73B | $93.69B | $240.91B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.58B | $15.19B | $92.18B | $53.81B | $90.37B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $353M | $934M | $2.27B | $4.34B | $7.26B |
| Gross Margin | 17.5% | 14.4% | 4.8% | 15.2% | 20.2% |
| Operating Margin | 8.0% | 8.4% | -5.9% | 10.2% | 10.4% |
| Forward P/E | 21.0x | 14.0x | 95.5x | 20.9x | 25.8x |
| Total Debt | $2.71B | $4.28B | $54.43B | $9.79B | $39.51B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.95B | $2.02B | $10.92B | $2.33B | $7.43B |
EMBJ vs TXT vs BA vs GD vs RTX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Textron Inc. (TXT) | 100 | 293.3 | +193.3% |
| The Boeing Company (BA) | 100 | 162.4 | +62.4% |
| General Dynamics Co… (GD) | 100 | 236.0 | +136.0% |
| RTX Corporation (RTX) | 100 | 277.3 | +177.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EMBJ vs TXT vs BA vs GD vs RTX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, EMBJ doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
TXT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.46 vs GD's 2.96
- Lower P/E (14.0x vs 25.8x)
BA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 34.5%, EPS growth 113.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.3%
- 34.5% revenue growth vs TXT's 8.0%
GD carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.54, yield 1.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.54, Low D/E 38.2%, current ratio 1.44x
- Beta 0.54, yield 1.7%, current ratio 1.44x
- 8.1% margin vs BA's 2.5%
RTX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 233.7% 10Y total return vs GD's 170.2%
- Beta 0.50 vs EMBJ's 1.85, lower leverage
- +39.1% vs EMBJ's -9.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 34.5% revenue growth vs TXT's 8.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.0x vs 25.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.1% margin vs BA's 2.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.50 vs EMBJ's 1.85, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield, 12-year raise streak, vs EMBJ's 0.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +39.1% vs EMBJ's -9.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.5% ROA vs BA's 1.4%, ROIC 12.5% vs -9.5% |
EMBJ vs TXT vs BA vs GD vs RTX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
EMBJ vs TXT vs BA vs GD vs RTX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
GD leads in 2 of 6 categories
TXT leads 1 • RTX leads 1 • EMBJ leads 0 • BA leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — GD and RTX each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BA is the larger business by revenue, generating $92.2B annually — 12.2x EMBJ's $7.6B. GD is the more profitable business, keeping 8.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BA's 2.5%. On growth, BA holds the edge at +14.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7.6B | $15.2B | $92.2B | $53.8B | $90.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $853M | $1.7B | -$3.4B | $6.2B | $13.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $353M | $934M | $2.3B | $4.3B | $7.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $527M | $707M | -$1.0B | $6.2B | $8.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +17.5% | +14.4% | +4.8% | +15.2% | +20.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.0% | +8.4% | -5.9% | +10.2% | +10.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.6% | +6.1% | +2.5% | +8.1% | +8.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.1% | +4.7% | -1.1% | +11.5% | +9.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +11.8% | +14.0% | +10.3% | +8.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +76.0% | +10.6% | +31.3% | +12.0% | +32.5% |
Valuation Metrics
TXT leads this category, winning 7 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.8x trailing earnings, TXT trades at a 81% valuation discount to BA's 95.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TXT offers better value at 0.58x vs GD's 3.18x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $11.0B | $15.8B | $186.7B | $93.7B | $240.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $11.7B | $18.1B | $230.2B | $101.1B | $273.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 31.23x | 17.77x | 95.51x | 22.41x | 36.07x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.97x | 13.95x | — | 20.85x | 25.82x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.58x | — | 3.18x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.53x | 10.95x | — | 16.76x | 21.18x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.45x | 1.07x | 2.09x | 1.78x | 2.72x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.88x | 2.08x | 33.09x | 3.70x | 3.61x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 28.44x | 17.89x | — | 23.67x | 30.34x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GD leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BA delivers a 2.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $3 in annual profit, vs $10 for EMBJ. GD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.38x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BA's 9.97x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GD scores 8/9 vs BA's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.5% | +12.1% | +2.9% | +17.4% | +10.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.9% | +5.3% | +1.4% | +7.5% | +4.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.3% | +9.4% | -9.5% | +12.5% | +6.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.8% | +9.5% | -9.1% | +13.6% | +7.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.71x | 0.54x | 9.97x | 0.38x | 0.59x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $762M | $2.3B | $43.5B | $7.5B | $32.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.9B | $2.0B | $10.9B | $2.3B | $7.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.7B | $4.3B | $54.4B | $9.8B | $39.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.31x | 12.38x | 1.89x | 18.94x | 5.58x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RTX leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RTX five years ago would be worth $23,181 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,023 for EMBJ. Over the past 12 months, RTX leads with a +39.1% total return vs EMBJ's -9.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RTX at 24.8% vs EMBJ's -3.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -8.4% | +4.4% | +4.0% | +1.8% | -4.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -9.8% | +18.4% | +19.3% | +27.6% | +39.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -9.8% | +43.9% | +18.0% | +73.2% | +94.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -9.8% | +41.8% | +7.3% | +99.9% | +131.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -8.9% | +142.0% | +94.8% | +170.2% | +233.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -3.4% | +12.9% | +5.7% | +20.1% | +24.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — GD and RTX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
RTX is the less volatile stock with a 0.50 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EMBJ's 1.85 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GD currently trades 93.7% from its 52-week high vs EMBJ's 74.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.85x | 0.90x | 0.99x | 0.54x | 0.50x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $80.75 | $101.57 | $254.35 | $369.70 | $214.50 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $54.28 | $72.00 | $176.77 | $267.39 | $127.39 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +74.3% | +89.4% | +93.1% | +93.7% | +83.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.0 | 51.2 | 63.1 | 54.0 | 41.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.7M | 1.3M | 6.6M | 1.3M | 5.1M |
Analyst Outlook
GD leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EMBJ as "Buy", TXT as "Hold", BA as "Buy", GD as "Buy", RTX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 25.7% upside for RTX (target: $225) vs 8.4% for EMBJ (target: $65). For income investors, GD offers the higher dividend yield at 1.68% vs TXT's 0.12%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $65.00 | $107.40 | $267.36 | $408.83 | $224.89 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 21 | 29 | 54 | 34 | 26 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.2% | +0.1% | +0.2% | +1.7% | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 2 | 0 | 12 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.13 | $0.11 | $0.43 | $5.82 | $2.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.7% | +6.8% | 0.0% | +0.7% | +0.0% |
GD leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). TXT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
EMBJ vs TXT vs BA vs GD vs RTX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Boeing Company (BA) is the stronger pick with 34.
5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 8. 0% for Textron Inc. (TXT). Textron Inc. (TXT) offers the better valuation at 17. 8x trailing P/E (14. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Embraer S. A. (EMBJ) a "Buy" — based on 21 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 — EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX?
On trailing P/E, Textron Inc.
(TXT) is the cheapest at 17. 8x versus The Boeing Company at 95. 5x. On forward P/E, Textron Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Textron Inc. wins at 0. 46x versus General Dynamics Corporation's 2. 96x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX?
Over the past 5 years, RTX Corporation (RTX) delivered a total return of +131.
8%, compared to -9. 8% for Embraer S. A. (EMBJ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RTX returned +233. 7% versus EMBJ's -8. 9%. 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 — EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), RTX Corporation (RTX) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
50β versus Embraer S. A. 's 1. 85β — meaning EMBJ is approximately 271% more volatile than RTX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, General Dynamics Corporation (GD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 38% versus 10% for The Boeing Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Boeing Company (BA) is pulling ahead at 34.
5% versus 8. 0% for Textron Inc. (TXT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Boeing Company grew EPS 113. 5% year-over-year, compared to 0. 0% for Embraer S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BA leads at 10. 3% 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 — EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX?
General Dynamics Corporation (GD) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
0% net margin versus 2. 5% for The Boeing Company — meaning it keeps 8. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GD leads at 10. 2% versus -6. 1% for BA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RTX leads at 20. 1%, 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 EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX more undervalued right now?
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, Textron Inc. (TXT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 46x versus General Dynamics Corporation's 2. 96x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Textron Inc. (TXT) trades at 14. 0x forward P/E versus 25. 8x for RTX Corporation — 11. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RTX: 25. 7% to $224. 89.
08Which pays a better dividend — EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
General Dynamics Corporation (GD) offers the highest yield at 1. 7%, versus 0. 1% for Textron Inc. (TXT).
09Is EMBJ or TXT or BA or GD or RTX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, RTX Corporation (RTX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
50), 1. 5% yield, +233. 7% 10Y return). Embraer S. A. (EMBJ) carries a higher beta of 1. 85 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (RTX: +233. 7%, EMBJ: -8. 9%), 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 EMBJ and TXT and BA and GD and RTX?
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: EMBJ is a mid-cap high-growth stock; TXT is a mid-cap deep-value stock; BA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; GD is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; RTX is a large-cap quality compounder stock. GD, RTX pay a dividend while EMBJ, TXT, BA 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.