Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: LLY stock price vs LMT: 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 LMT's multiple
Needs LMT P/E.
Implied fair value · at LLY's multiple
Needs LLY 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
Eight 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.
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY · implied price per share
Five annual free-cash-flow observations are required for the filing-backed baseline.
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
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.
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
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.
Pfizer Inc.
LLY vs PFE
Merck & Co., Inc.
LLY vs MRK
Johnson & Johnson
LLY vs JNJ
AbbVie Inc.
LLY vs ABBV
Amgen Inc.
LLY vs AMGN
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
LLY vs BMY
BOEING CO
LLY vs BA
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP /DE/
LLY vs NOC
TEXTRON INC
LLY vs TXT
HUNTINGTON INGALLS INDUSTRIES, INC.
LLY vs HII
AXON ENTERPRISE, INC.
LLY vs AXON
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
LLY vs HWM
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 LLY can sustain 44.7% revenue growth and premium margins over time, then hold or be selective on exposure because the operating profile is strong but the current valuation already discounts a very optimistic outcome; if growth normalizes, LMT-implied downside is material.
LLY trades at a large premium to LMT across valuation measures, while the model’s LMT-implied price is far below the current quote. The gap is driven by LLY’s much higher growth and profitability, but the current valuation still looks stretched relative to LMT comparison.
Supporting Metrics
