LMT vs MOOG Stock Comparison
Compare LMT and MOOG across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between LMT and MOOG?
MOOG leads the current stock comparison as MOOG, with the clearest separation coming from balanced and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Lockheed Martin Corporation vs MOOG
MOOG leads
MOOG leads by 9 AIQ points, having only recently taken the lead back from LMT.
Fragile: 1 of 1 evidence groups support MOOG, and the lead recently changed hands.
Lockheed Martin Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MOOG over LMT, 50 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. 1 of 1 covered evidence groups favor MOOG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. MOOG lead: Reversed — LMT led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MOOG now leads by 9.
Compare Lockheed Martin Corporation and MOOG across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare LMT and MOOG against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
MOOG's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LMT and MOOG both carry a full feed there.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
MOOGMOOG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | LMT | MOOG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +19.1% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | +20% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 0 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 1 covered evidence groups favor MOOG. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MOOG | 41 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | Not covered | Not covered |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LMT and MOOG and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 9 points.
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on MOOG.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MOOG lead: Reversed — LMT led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MOOG now leads by 9.
- Today
- MOOG +9
- 41 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- MOOG +9
- 41 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- LMT +3
- 53 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- LMT +5
- 55 vs 50
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Jul 23 when LMT moved ahead of MOOG.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.25%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
No active signals
LMT is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.12%, AIQ 0 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1LMT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 2MOOG starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 3A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
Split| Metric | LMT | MOOG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 11.3% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 23.3% | — |
| Gross margin | 11.8% | — |
| Operating margin | 11.9% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 86.2% | — |
| Debt to equity | 2.34 | — |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | LMT | MOOG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.3% | — |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -12.6% | — |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1% | — |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -18.4% | — |
| Year to date | 9.6% | — |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 15.5% | — |
Technicals
Split| Metric | LMT | MOOG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.7 | — |
| ADX (14) | 25.8 | — |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.8% | — |
| Price vs 200-day | -5% | — |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28% | — |
Risk
Split| Metric | LMT | MOOG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.06 | — |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.53 | — |
| Sortino ratio | 0.91 | — |
| Max drawdown | -27.4% | — |
| Current drawdown | -21.7% | — |
| Annualized volatility | 28.4% | — |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.7% | — |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LMT or MOOG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MOOG is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 50 against LMT's 41. The edge comes from its factor profile. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is LMT or MOOG the better buy right now?
MOOG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 1 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MOOG over LMT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. . Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LMT or MOOG?
Analyst price targets imply +19.1% upside for LMT and not covered for MOOG. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, LMT or MOOG?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, LMT or MOOG?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, LMT or MOOG?
The two are level on Momentum. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, LMT or MOOG?
The two are close on downside measures. Downside measures are level or not covered. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is LMT more profitable than MOOG?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is MOOG's lead over LMT getting stronger or weaker?
MOOG lead: Reversed — LMT led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MOOG now leads by 9. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-23, when LMT moved ahead of MOOG.
What would change the LMT vs MOOG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: LMT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; MOOG starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about LMT and MOOG?
LMT: 1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted. MOOG: No active signals. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on LMT is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare LMT and MOOG with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.