Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: BA stock price vs WAT: inconclusive Relative valuation is incomplete for this pair. Review the available filing metrics before drawing a conclusion.
Quick read
Each company valued on the other's multiple, then compared with the market price.
Implied fair value · at WAT's multiple
Needs WAT P/E.
Implied fair value · at BA's multiple
Needs BA P/E.
Price unavailable
Metric by metric
Where each company leads, and how wide the gap is.
Growth edge
Reported gross margin
Operating income + D&A
Lower is better
Not comparable
Lower leverage
Statements
Annual statements in reported currencies, with calculations and source evidence.
Values retain reported currencies and share bases. Select a figure to inspect its period, calculation and filing inputs. Differences require compatible units and periods.
Explore enterprise value and market valuation multiples in the valuation sections.
Trendline
16 period-end years of reported revenue, earnings, and margins. Periods and currencies are shown with the data.
Price framework
USD market cap plus reported borrowing debt, less cash and equivalents. This EV proxy excludes investments, preferred stock and noncontrolling-interest adjustments.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Price framework
The same filing-backed model used on each company's valuation page, with company-specific inputs and calculated scenarios.
THE BOEING COMPANY · implied price per share
Latest annual free cash flow must be positive to qualify the filing-backed baseline.
Waters Corporation · implied price per share
Five annual free-cash-flow observations are required for the filing-backed baseline.
Balance sheet health
Inspect reported liquidity and leverage alongside historical financial-health checks.
Financial strength on a 0–9 scale.
Bankruptcy-risk signal from balance sheet and earnings power.
Not enough data to score either balance sheet.
Comparable set
Where the pair sits against the wider comparable set.
Keep comparing
Open adjacent comparisons from the same industry to pressure-test the read across multiple pairs.
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP
BA vs LMT
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP /DE/
BA vs NOC
GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP
BA vs GD
TEXTRON INC
BA vs TXT
DANAHER CORP /DE/
BA vs DHR
AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
BA vs A
BIO-RAD LABORATORIES, INC.
BA vs BIO
THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INC.
BA vs TMO
BRUKER CORP
BA vs BRKR
BIO-TECHNE Corp
BA vs TECH
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
LLM-powered synthesis
An explanation of the financial evidence. Check its snapshot date against the figures above.
This explanation uses an earlier data snapshot or evidence version. Review its generation date and the current figures, or refresh after signing in.
If you believe BA can sustain its 34.5% revenue growth while materially improving margins and reducing leverage, then a more constructive view may be justified; otherwise, the data support avoiding or underweighting BA versus WAT because BA's valuation is rich relative to its weaker profitability and balance-sheet quality.
BA is implied at $86.96 versus a current price of $216.14, indicating -59.8% downside in the provided P/E framework. The discount to WAT benchmark is driven by BA's much lower quality profile and weaker profitability, despite its larger revenue base.
Supporting Metrics
