Howmet Aerospace vs Parsons
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put Howmet Aerospace and Parsons side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- Howmet Aerospace is the larger business, with $8.3B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $6.4B for Parsons.
- Howmet Aerospace grew revenue faster (11.1%, against −5.7%).
- Howmet Aerospace kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (24.8% operating margin, against 6.6%).
- Howmet Aerospace turned more of its sales into free cash flow (17.3% FCF margin, against 6.5%).
- Howmet Aerospace earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (22.4%, against 9.8%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of Howmet Aerospace’s earnings: a P/E of 41.9x against 23.9x for Parsons.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 10 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
Howmet Aerospace
HWM
7/10
Revenue growthOperating marginNet marginFCF marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityNet debt / EBITDA
Parsons
PSN
2/10
5-year growthShare count change
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | HWM FY25 | PSN FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $78.1B | $5.4B |
| Revenue | $8.3B | $6.4B |
| Free cash flow | $1.4B | $410M |
| Net income | $1.5B | $241M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 11.1% | −5.7% |
| 5-year growth | 9.4% | 10.2% |
| Share count change | −1.0% | −2.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | — | 22.5% |
| Operating margin | 24.8% | 6.6% |
| Net margin | 18.3% | 3.8% |
| FCF margin | 17.3% | 6.5% |
| Return on capital | 22.4% | 9.8% |
| Return on equity | 30.4% | 9.5% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $2.3B | $781M |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.0x | 1.5x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $881M | $125M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 41.9x | 23.9x |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
Ten years
Revenue
Operating margin
Free cash flow
Return on capital
Each company's latest fiscal year; fiscal years end in different months. The best value in each row is highlighted where higher (or lower) is clearly better. Not investment advice.