KEN vs ESLT

For growth investors, Elbit Systems Ltd.

(ESLT) is the stronger pick with 23. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 8. 6% for Kenon Holdings Ltd. (KEN). Kenon Holdings Ltd. (KEN) offers the better valuation at 7. 6x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Kenon Holdings Ltd. (KEN) a "Hold" — based on 1 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, Kenon Holdings Ltd.

(KEN) is the cheapest at 7. 6x versus Elbit Systems Ltd. at 64. 5x.

Over the past 5 years, Elbit Systems Ltd.

(ESLT) delivered a total return of +486. 3%, compared to +240. 6% for Kenon Holdings Ltd. (KEN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KEN returned +1257% versus ESLT's +737. 2%. 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), Elbit Systems Ltd.

(ESLT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 35β versus Kenon Holdings Ltd. 's 0. 90β — meaning KEN is approximately 156% more volatile than ESLT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Elbit Systems Ltd. (ESLT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 48% for Kenon Holdings Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Elbit Systems Ltd.

(ESLT) is pulling ahead at 23. 9% versus 8. 6% for Kenon Holdings Ltd. (KEN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Kenon Holdings Ltd. grew EPS 356. 6% year-over-year, compared to 71. 7% for Elbit Systems Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ESLT leads at 17. 8% 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.

Kenon Holdings Ltd.

(KEN) is the more profitable company, earning 79. 6% net margin versus 6. 7% for Elbit Systems Ltd. — meaning it keeps 79. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ESLT leads at 8. 8% versus 6. 3% for KEN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ESLT leads at 24. 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.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Kenon Holdings Ltd. (KEN) offers the highest yield at 4. 4%, versus 0. 3% for Elbit Systems Ltd. (ESLT).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Kenon Holdings Ltd.

(KEN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 90), 4. 4% yield, +1257% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KEN: +1257%, ESLT: +737. 2%), 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 (KEN (Utilities) and ESLT (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: KEN is a small-cap deep-value stock; ESLT is a mid-cap high-growth stock. KEN pays a dividend while ESLT 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.