Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: LMT stock price vs TMO: 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 TMO's multiple
Needs TMO P/E.
Implied fair value · at LMT's multiple
Needs LMT 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
Nine 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.
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INC. · 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.
BOEING CO
LMT vs BA
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP /DE/
LMT vs NOC
TEXTRON INC
LMT vs TXT
HUNTINGTON INGALLS INDUSTRIES, INC.
LMT vs HII
AXON ENTERPRISE, INC.
LMT vs AXON
Howmet Aerospace Inc.
LMT vs HWM
Agilent Technologies, Inc.
LMT vs A
DANAHER CORP /DE/
LMT vs DHR
Illumina, Inc.
LMT vs ILMN
BRUKER CORP
LMT vs BRKR
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 LMT can sustain its 5.6% revenue growth and 30.4% ROIC without margin compression or leverage stress, then the stock looks attractive versus TMO because TMO-implied model still shows 18.6% upside and LMT trades cheaper on P/E and P/S.
On a P/E basis, LMT looks discounted to TMO at 27.3x versus 32.4x, and the implied price of $695.37 suggests 18.6% upside from the current $586.29. However, the broader valuation picture is less clean because LMT also trades at much lower P/S and EV/Revenue multiples than TMO, while its EV/EBITDA discount is modest.
Supporting Metrics
