CACI International vs Science Applications Intl
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put CACI International and Science Applications Intl side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- CACI International is the larger business, with $9.6B of revenue in fiscal 2026 against $7.3B for Science Applications Intl.
- CACI International grew revenue faster (10.9%, against −2.9%).
- CACI International kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (9.6% operating margin, against 7.2%).
- Science Applications Intl earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (12.8%, against 8.8%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of CACI International’s earnings: a P/E of 27.3x against 17.3x for Science Applications Intl.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 10 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
CACI International
CACI
5/10
Revenue growth5-year growthOperating marginNet marginFCF margin
Science Applications Intl
SAIC
5/10
Return on capitalReturn on equityPiotroski F-scoreNet debt / EBITDAShare count change
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | CACI FY26 | SAIC FY26 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $14.8B | $6.4B |
| Revenue | $9.6B | $7.3B |
| Free cash flow | $780M | $577M |
| Net income | $536M | $358M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 10.9% | −2.9% |
| 5-year growth | 9.6% | 0.6% |
| Share count change | −1.0% | −7.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | — | 12.0% |
| Operating margin | 9.6% | 7.2% |
| Net margin | 5.6% | 4.9% |
| FCF margin | 8.2% | 8.0% |
| Return on capital | 8.8% | 12.8% |
| Return on equity | 12.8% | 23.3% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $4.7B | $2.3B |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.7x | 4.2x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $17.1M | $515M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 27.3x | 17.3x |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 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.