Aerospace & Defense
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LOAR vs TDG vs CW vs DRS vs WWD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
Aerospace & Defense
LOAR vs TDG vs CW vs DRS vs WWD — 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 | $5.62B | $70.14B | $26.70B | $11.05B | $22.10B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $538M | $9.11B | $3.61B | $3.69B | $4.00B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $68M | $1.97B | $511M | $290M | $514M |
| Gross Margin | 50.8% | 59.0% | 37.2% | 24.2% | 28.4% |
| Operating Margin | 23.1% | 46.5% | 18.5% | 9.9% | 15.0% |
| Forward P/E | 75.8x | 32.0x | 48.0x | 33.0x | 41.5x |
| Total Debt | $14M | $30.03B | $1.31B | $470M | $722M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $85M | $2.81B | $371M | $647M | $327M |
LOAR vs TDG vs CW vs DRS vs WWD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Apr 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Loar Holdings Inc. (LOAR) | 100 | 114.8 | +14.8% |
| TransDigm Group Inc… (TDG) | 100 | 99.5 | -0.5% |
| Curtiss-Wright Corp… (CW) | 100 | 285.4 | +185.4% |
| Leonardo DRS, Inc. (DRS) | 100 | 192.6 | +92.6% |
| Woodward, Inc. (WWD) | 100 | 228.4 | +128.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LOAR vs TDG vs CW vs DRS vs WWD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LOAR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 23.2%, EPS growth 212.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 27.5%
- 23.2% revenue growth vs WWD's 7.3%
TDG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.79, yield 13.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.79, current ratio 3.21x
- PEG 1.03 vs WWD's 2.97
- Beta 0.79, yield 13.3%, current ratio 3.21x
CW ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +100.0% vs LOAR's -38.4%
DRS is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 54.1% 10Y total return vs CW's 8.2%
WWD is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- 10.8% ROA vs LOAR's 3.7%, ROIC 13.3% vs 7.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 23.2% revenue growth vs WWD's 7.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (32.0x vs 41.5x), PEG 1.03 vs 2.97 | |
| Quality / Margins | 21.6% margin vs DRS's 7.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.79 vs LOAR's 1.32 | |
| Dividends | 13.3% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs CW's 0.1%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.0% vs LOAR's -38.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.8% ROA vs LOAR's 3.7%, ROIC 13.3% vs 7.3% |
LOAR vs TDG vs CW vs DRS vs WWD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
LOAR vs TDG vs CW vs DRS vs WWD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TDG leads in 2 of 6 categories
WWD leads 1 • CW leads 1 • LOAR leads 0 • DRS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TDG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TDG is the larger business by revenue, generating $9.1B annually — 16.9x LOAR's $538M. TDG is the more profitable business, keeping 21.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to DRS's 7.8%. On growth, LOAR holds the edge at +36.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $538M | $9.1B | $3.6B | $3.7B | $4.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $163M | $4.6B | $729M | $436M | $715M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $68M | $2.0B | $511M | $290M | $514M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $100M | $1.9B | $591M | $397M | $389M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +50.8% | +59.0% | +37.2% | +24.2% | +28.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +23.1% | +46.5% | +18.5% | +9.9% | +15.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +12.6% | +21.6% | +14.2% | +7.8% | +12.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +18.5% | +20.6% | +16.4% | +10.7% | +9.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +36.1% | +13.9% | +13.4% | +5.9% | +23.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -25.0% | -13.1% | +29.1% | +21.1% | +23.0% |
Valuation Metrics
TDG leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 38.7x trailing earnings, TDG trades at a 52% valuation discount to LOAR's 80.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TDG offers better value at 1.24x vs WWD's 3.69x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.6B | $70.1B | $26.7B | $11.1B | $22.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.6B | $97.4B | $27.6B | $10.9B | $22.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 80.08x | 38.72x | 56.20x | 40.23x | 51.57x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 75.83x | 32.01x | 48.02x | 33.01x | 41.46x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.24x | 2.58x | 3.20x | 3.69x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 32.92x | 21.48x | 43.32x | 24.67x | 36.03x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 11.33x | 7.94x | 7.63x | 3.03x | 6.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.90x | — | 10.74x | 4.08x | 8.88x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 56.65x | 38.63x | 48.21x | 48.70x | 64.94x |
Profitability & Efficiency
WWD leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
WWD delivers a 20.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $6 for LOAR. LOAR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CW's 0.52x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), WWD scores 9/9 vs TDG's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.9% | — | +19.6% | +10.8% | +20.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.7% | +8.6% | +9.8% | +6.8% | +10.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.3% | +20.9% | +14.1% | +10.5% | +13.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.0% | +20.8% | +16.6% | +10.8% | +14.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | — | 0.52x | 0.17x | 0.28x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$71M | $27.2B | $943M | -$177M | $395M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $85M | $2.8B | $371M | $647M | $327M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $14M | $30.0B | $1.3B | $470M | $722M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.11x | 2.55x | 15.90x | 40.86x | 14.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CW leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CW five years ago would be worth $54,902 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $12,307 for LOAR. Over the past 12 months, CW leads with a +100.0% total return vs LOAR's -38.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CW at 64.7% vs LOAR's 7.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -14.5% | -8.6% | +26.4% | +19.4% | +19.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -38.4% | -3.7% | +100.0% | +0.6% | +91.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +23.1% | +86.7% | +347.1% | +165.6% | +244.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +23.1% | +140.2% | +449.0% | +231.9% | +188.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +23.1% | +595.3% | +815.8% | +5411.8% | +600.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +7.2% | +23.1% | +64.7% | +38.5% | +51.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TDG and CW each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TDG is the less volatile stock with a 0.79 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LOAR's 1.32 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CW currently trades 96.4% from its 52-week high vs LOAR's 60.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.32x | 0.79x | 1.23x | 0.95x | 1.19x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $99.67 | $1623.83 | $750.00 | $49.31 | $407.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $53.15 | $1123.61 | $359.48 | $32.43 | $193.38 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +60.3% | +76.5% | +96.4% | +84.0% | +91.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.3 | 56.5 | 59.8 | 46.5 | 55.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 370K | 303K | 1.1M | 692K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TDG and CW each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LOAR as "Buy", TDG as "Buy", CW as "Buy", DRS as "Buy", WWD as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 56.5% upside for LOAR (target: $94) vs -2.0% for CW (target: $709). For income investors, TDG offers the higher dividend yield at 13.32% vs CW's 0.13%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $94.00 | $1617.88 | $708.50 | $53.00 | $433.17 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 39 | 25 | 9 | 20 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +13.3% | +0.1% | +0.9% | +0.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 | 10 | 0 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $165.45 | $0.92 | $0.36 | $1.06 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.7% | +1.7% | +0.3% | +0.8% |
TDG leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). WWD leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
LOAR vs TDG vs CW vs DRS vs WWD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Loar Holdings Inc.
(LOAR) is the stronger pick with 23. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 3% for Woodward, Inc. (WWD). TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG) offers the better valuation at 38. 7x trailing P/E (32. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Loar Holdings Inc. (LOAR) a "Buy" — based on 3 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 — LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD?
On trailing P/E, TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG) is the cheapest at 38.
7x versus Loar Holdings Inc. at 80. 1x. On forward P/E, TransDigm Group Incorporated is actually cheaper at 32. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: TransDigm Group Incorporated wins at 1. 03x versus Woodward, Inc. 's 2. 97x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD?
Over the past 5 years, Curtiss-Wright Corporation (CW) delivered a total return of +449.
0%, compared to +23. 1% for Loar Holdings Inc. (LOAR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: DRS returned +54. 1% versus LOAR's +23. 1%. 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 — LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
79β versus Loar Holdings Inc. 's 1. 32β — meaning LOAR is approximately 68% more volatile than TDG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Loar Holdings Inc. (LOAR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 52% for Curtiss-Wright Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Loar Holdings Inc.
(LOAR) is pulling ahead at 23. 2% versus 7. 3% for Woodward, Inc. (WWD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Loar Holdings Inc. grew EPS 212. 5% year-over-year, compared to 19. 6% for Woodward, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LOAR leads at 27. 5% 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 — LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD?
TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG) is the more profitable company, earning 23.
5% net margin versus 7. 6% for Leonardo DRS, Inc. — meaning it keeps 23. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TDG leads at 47. 2% versus 9. 5% for DRS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TDG leads at 60. 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 LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD 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, TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 03x versus Woodward, Inc. 's 2. 97x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG) trades at 32. 0x forward P/E versus 75. 8x for Loar Holdings Inc. — 43. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LOAR: 56. 5% to $94. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD?
In this comparison, TDG (13.
3% yield), DRS (0. 9% yield), WWD (0. 3% yield), CW (0. 1% yield) pay a dividend. LOAR does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LOAR or TDG or CW or DRS or WWD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, TransDigm Group Incorporated (TDG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
79), 13. 3% yield, +595. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TDG: +595. 3%, LOAR: +23. 1%), 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 LOAR and TDG and CW and DRS and WWD?
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: LOAR is a small-cap high-growth stock; TDG is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; CW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; DRS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; WWD is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. TDG, DRS pay a dividend while LOAR, CW, WWD 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.