LMT vs NOC: Lockheed Martin vs Northrop Grumman Stock Comparison: AI Score, Valuation, Performance and Upside
Lockheed Martin is the world's largest defense contractor with the F-35 fighter jet and HIMARS missiles as its anchors, while Northrop Grumman has the B-21 Raider bomber and GBSD ICBM as near-monopoly US strategic deterrence programs. Both are high-quality defense companies with different program risks.
LMT vs NOC is the world's most valuable fighter program plus growing missile demand versus monopoly stealth bomber and ICBM modernization — Lockheed wins if F-35 production ramp and HIMARS demand continue; Northrop wins if B-21 and GBSD execute on cost without fixed-price overruns.
NOC holds the edge across 3 of 5 key metrics in this comparison. LMT leads on both 1-year return (+11.37%) and forward P/E quality (16.31x vs 17.90x for NOC), a relatively favorable combination of momentum and valuation. NOC leads on both revenue growth (4.40%) and operating margin (11.69%), suggesting a stronger fundamental setup on both dimensions. Analyst consensus implies meaningfully more upside for NOC (+27.34%) than for LMT (+17.68%).
- →want the world's largest defense contractor with diversified revenue across fighters, missiles, and space
- →value F-35's 3,300+ planned unit production as a multi-decade revenue and sustainment stream
- →believe HIMARS demand from European allies and Pacific partners will sustain elevated missile orders
- →prefer a more diversified defense portfolio vs Northrop's concentration in B-21 and GBSD
- →want near-monopoly exposure to US strategic deterrence (B-21 bomber, GBSD ICBM)
- →believe the B-21 program will be managed to avoid the fixed-price overruns common to new bomber programs
- →value Space Force satellite and C4ISR programs as a growing government market for Northrop
- →prefer a higher strategic asset concentration vs Lockheed's broader program mix
| Metric | LMT | NOC |
|---|---|---|
| AI score | 41.9 | 51.1 |
| AI rank | #973 | #442 |
| Latest close | $520.68 | $541.82 |
| 1M return | -3.64% | -1.55% |
| 6M return | -4.10% | -12.44% |
| 1Y return | +11.37% | +5.29% |
How much would $10,000 be worth today if invested at the start of each period, with all dividends reinvested?
| Period | LMT | NOC |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y ago | $10.99K (+9.9%) started 2025-07-14 | $10.4K (+4.0%) started 2025-07-14 |
| 5Y ago | $17K (+70.0%) started 2021-07-14 | $16.83K (+68.3%) started 2021-07-14 |
| 10Y ago | $33.22K (+232.2%) started 2016-07-14 | $32.75K (+227.5%) started 2016-07-14 |
Hypothetical — past performance does not guarantee future results.
| Metric | LMT | NOC |
|---|---|---|
| Market cap | $120.64B | $76.65B |
| Trailing P/E | 25.31 | 16.92 |
| Forward P/E | 16.31 | 17.90 |
| Price/Sales | 1.57 | 1.74 |
| EV/Revenue | 1.86 | 2.17 |
| Analyst target | $615.74 | $687.14 |
| Target upside | +17.68% | +27.34% |
| Metric | LMT | NOC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth | 0.30% | 4.40% |
| Earnings growth | -11.50% | 84.90% |
| EPS growth | -11.50% | +84.90% |
| FCF margin | +5.31% | +4.89% |
| Operating margin | 11.00% | 11.69% |
| Profit margin | 6.38% | 10.80% |
| ROIC proxy | 67.64% | 28.51% |
| Return on equity | 67.64% | 28.51% |
| Dividend yield | 2.66% | 1.74% |
| Beta | 0.11 | -0.10 |
| Debt/equity | 276.37 | 102.68 |
| Current ratio | 1.14 | 1.15 |
| Quick ratio | 0.91 | 0.98 |
Lower drawdown and smaller single-period drops generally indicate a smoother ride, though they do not guarantee lower future risk.
| Period | Metric | LMT | NOC |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Y | Growth | +9.95% | +3.97% |
| CAGR | +9.99% | +3.99% | |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.32 | 0.12 | |
| Max drawdown | 27.35% | 35.42% | |
| Max daily drop | 10.81% | 6.98% | |
| Max wkly drop | 13.30% | 13.55% | |
| 5Y | Growth | +52.91% | +58.17% |
| CAGR | +8.87% | +9.61% | |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.29 | 0.31 | |
| Max drawdown | 32.26% | 35.42% | |
| Max daily drop | 11.80% | 12.66% | |
| Max wkly drop | 13.30% | 13.85% | |
| 10Y | Growth | +156.25% | +181.85% |
| CAGR | +9.87% | +10.92% | |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.33 | 0.36 | |
| Max drawdown | 36.67% | 36.38% | |
| Max daily drop | 12.76% | 12.66% | |
| Max wkly drop | 19.06% | 16.45% |
| Category | LMT | NOC |
|---|---|---|
| Company | Lockheed Martin Corporation | Northrop Grumman Corporation |
| Sector | Industrials | Industrials |
| Industry | Aerospace & Defense | Aerospace & Defense |
| Core business | World's largest defense contractor by revenue with F-35 fighters (the most expensive weapons program ever), missile and fire control (HIMARS, PAC-3 missiles), rotary/mission systems (Black Hawk helicopters), and space systems. | Major US defense contractor with B-21 Raider stealth bomber, Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) ICBM program, space systems, and cyber and C4ISR electronics. Northrop's space and missile programs are uniquely positioned for great power competition. |
| Investor focus | F-35 production ramp and international orders, missile demand from global conflicts, space segment growth, and cash return to shareholders. | B-21 Raider production ramp and margin improvement (fixed-price contract challenges), GBSD program execution, space segment growth, and shareholder return. |
- →F-35 program has 3,300+ planned units across the US and allied nations — a multi-decade production and sustainment revenue stream
- →HIMARS and PAC-3 missile systems have seen surging demand from global conflicts and allied nation procurement
- →International F-35 sales to Norway, Japan, Singapore, and others are growing the program's revenue base beyond US DOD
- →B-21 Raider is the US Air Force's next-generation stealth bomber — a monopoly program for the next 30+ years of manned strategic bombing
- →GBSD ICBM modernization is the only new US land-based ICBM program — another long-duration near-monopoly
- →Space systems and satellite intelligence are growing with the Space Force and national security satellite demand
- →F-35 software delays and engine issues have created program risk and cost growth
- →F-35 unit cost reduction has been challenging — the program continues to face production timeline and margin pressure
- →US defense budget sequestration risk is a perennial concern for major weapons programs
- →B-21 is a fixed-price contract — Northrop bears all cost overrun risk, which has historically been significant for new bomber programs
- →GBSD cost overruns have already emerged — fixed-price exposure on two major programs simultaneously is a risk
- →Northrop's portfolio is more concentrated in longer-development programs vs Lockheed's more diversified product mix
Want deeper AI forecasts?
This comparison page is public and free forever. Subscribers can unlock saved watchlists, full AI rankings, detailed forecasts, and interactive analysis tools.