FTS vs GE

For growth investors, GE Aerospace (GE) is the stronger pick with 18.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 8% for Fortis Inc. (FTS). Fortis Inc. (FTS) offers the better valuation at 23. 0x trailing P/E (15. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate GE Aerospace (GE) a "Buy" — based on 34 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, Fortis Inc.

(FTS) is the cheapest at 23. 0x versus GE Aerospace at 35. 1x. On forward P/E, Fortis Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fortis Inc. wins at 3. 09x versus GE Aerospace's 3. 21x.

Over the past 5 years, GE Aerospace (GE) delivered a total return of +341.

4%, compared to +48. 5% for Fortis Inc. (FTS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FTS returned +130. 1% versus GE's +109. 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), Fortis Inc.

(FTS) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 26β versus GE Aerospace's 1. 14β — meaning GE is approximately -545% more volatile than FTS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, GE Aerospace (GE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 108% versus 134% for Fortis Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), GE Aerospace (GE) is pulling ahead at 18.

5% versus 5. 8% for Fortis Inc. (FTS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GE Aerospace grew EPS 36. 2% year-over-year, compared to 4. 9% for Fortis Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GE leads at 16. 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.

GE Aerospace (GE) is the more profitable company, earning 19.

0% net margin versus 14. 8% for Fortis Inc. — meaning it keeps 19. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FTS leads at 28. 7% versus 19. 1% for GE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FTS leads at 45. 6%, 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, Fortis Inc. (FTS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 3. 09x versus GE Aerospace's 3. 21x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Fortis Inc. (FTS) trades at 15. 6x forward P/E versus 37. 9x for GE Aerospace — 22. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GE: 34. 7% to $386. 20.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Fortis Inc. (FTS) offers the highest yield at 2. 1%, versus 0. 5% for GE Aerospace (GE).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Fortis Inc.

(FTS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 26), 2. 1% yield, +130. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FTS: +130. 1%, GE: +109. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (FTS (Utilities) and GE (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: FTS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; GE is a large-cap high-growth stock. FTS pays a dividend while GE does 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.