Compare StocksLHX vs V

L3Harris Technologies, Inc. (LHX) vs Visa Inc. (V): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-21, LHX is undervalued at $295, with a DCF intrinsic value of $427 and a margin of safety of 31%. V is fairly valued at $327, with an intrinsic value of $304 and a margin of safety of -8%. Of the two, LHX has the wider margin of safety.

LHX
L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
$294.82
VS
V
Visa Inc.
$327.24

Rewards

LHX
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 12.1% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $4.36 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
V
  • Visa Inc. has maintained ROIC above 15% for 4 consecutive years, indicating a durable competitive advantage.
  • Gross margin of 97.8% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • Visa Inc. scores 99/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with roic consistency as the strongest competitive dimension.

Risks

LHX
  • 9 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
V
  • Insiders have sold $14.2M worth of stock in the past 3 months — significant insider liquidation.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
LHX
V
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$20.84B
N/A
FCF Yield
3.35%
32.05
Trailing P/E
28.48
21.60
Forward P/E
22.02
Quality & Moat
3.20%
ROIC
38.39%
7.01%
ROE
60.35%
30.41%
Gross Margin
97.78%
1.69
PEG Ratio
1.44
Balance Sheet Safety
0.30
Net Debt / Equity
0.28
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
3.23
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.33
1.70%
Dividend Yield
0.82%
LHX: 1Ties: 2V: 7
LHXV

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
LHX

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

V

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

$1 Retained Earnings Test

Learn more →
LHX
$9.04
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$1.68B
Δ Market Cap
+$15.16B
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
V
$5.50
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$44.47B
Δ Market Cap
+$244.54B
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Analysis

Learn more →
LHX
31.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 31.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $294.82
Fair Value: $427.49
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
V
7.6% Overvalued
Price is 7.6% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $327.24
Fair Value: $304.21
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
LHX

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

V

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $327?

+13.9%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +13.4%

The market implies +13.9% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +13.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
LHX
59/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency would strengthen the moat.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.
V
99/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. ROIC Consistency is the standout factor.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
LHX
-2.38
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.
V
-2.50
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Ownership Breakdown

Learn more →
LHX
Insiders 0.4%Institutions 89.4%Retail & Other 10.2%
No. of Institutional Holders2,135
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
V
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 91.7%Retail & Other 8.2%
No. of Institutional Holders5,860
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

Insider Buying Activity

Learn more →
LHX
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
V
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises

Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.

Insider Selling Activity

Learn more →
LHX
1
Sells (3M)
9
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $65.34M
RAKITA MELANIE
Officer
$676,781
@ $310.45 · 2026-05-05
RAMBEAU JON
Officer
$2.05M
@ $370.32 · 2026-03-02
MEHTA SAMIR
Officer
$2.05M
@ $370.32 · 2026-03-02
RAKITA MELANIE
Officer
$1.09M
@ $348.38 · 2026-03-02
MEHTA SAMIR
Officer
$1.64M
@ $338.85 · 2026-02-05
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$4.27M
@ $301.05 · 2025-11-13
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$23.23M
@ $279.90 · 2025-09-12
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$10.82M
@ $269.52 · 2025-08-11
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$19.52M
@ $271.14 · 2025-07-29
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$8.76M
@ $248.39 · 2025-06-12
ZOISS EDWARD J
President
$490,000
@ $245.00 · 2025-05-27
RAMBEAU JON
Officer
$718,228
@ $226.00 · 2025-03-10
ZOISS EDWARD J
Officer
$1.09M
@ $211.68 · 2025-03-07
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$288,412
@ $210.06 · 2024-12-30
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$376,879
@ $213.65 · 2024-12-23
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$394,466
@ $223.62 · 2024-12-16
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$845,000
@ $260.00 · 2024-11-08
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$740,815
@ $247.93 · 2024-11-04
KUBASIK CHRISTOPHER E
Chief Executive Officer
$5.30M
@ $248.11 · 2024-10-31
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$731,104
@ $244.68 · 2024-10-02
NIEBERGALL ROSS S.
Officer
$707,200
@ $236.68 · 2024-09-03
MIKUEN SCOTT T
General Counsel
$6.15M
@ $233.01 · 2024-07-15
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
V
2
Sells (3M)
17
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $53.88M
SUH CHRIS
Chief Financial Officer
$3.46M
@ $324.81 · 2026-05-12
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$10.70M
@ $340.14 · 2026-04-29
CARNEY LLOYD A
Director
$201,253
@ $309.62 · 2026-03-11
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.66M
@ $349.18 · 2026-01-02
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.57M
@ $340.07 · 2025-12-11
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$699,315
@ $345.00 · 2025-12-11
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$7.84M
@ $330.14 · 2025-12-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$2.50M
@ $331.45 · 2025-12-02
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$2.08M
@ $330.00 · 2025-11-21
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$707,917
@ $325.93 · 2025-11-21
CARNEY LLOYD A
Director
$302,832
@ $336.48 · 2025-11-04
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.58M
@ $341.00 · 2025-11-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.59M
@ $342.30 · 2025-10-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.65M
@ $348.57 · 2025-09-02
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$697,329
@ $344.02 · 2025-08-18
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.60M
@ $343.13 · 2025-08-14
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.05M
@ $353.82 · 2025-07-01
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$4.36M
@ $375.00 · 2025-06-11
TANEJA RAJAT
President
$18.44M
@ $368.87 · 2025-06-05
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$17.10M
@ $370.00 · 2025-06-05
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.13M
@ $362.77 · 2025-06-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$6.32M
@ $357.45 · 2025-05-12
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$5.26M
@ $355.04 · 2025-05-08
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.98M
@ $345.58 · 2025-05-01
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$889,868
@ $345.58 · 2025-05-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.02M
@ $350.44 · 2025-04-01
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$13.40M
@ $340.41 · 2025-03-19
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$12.88M
@ $327.20 · 2025-03-14
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$3.13M
@ $363.00 · 2025-03-03
MAHON TULLIER KELLY
Officer
$11.80M
@ $349.77 · 2025-02-07
ANDRESKI PETER M
Officer
$815,314
@ $349.62 · 2025-02-07
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.93M
@ $340.00 · 2025-02-03
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$874,480
@ $340.00 · 2025-02-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.74M
@ $317.78 · 2025-01-02
TANEJA RAJAT
Officer
$11.15M
@ $315.55 · 2024-12-13
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.73M
@ $316.90 · 2024-12-02
FABARA PAUL D
Officer
$668,603
@ $307.97 · 2024-11-22
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.49M
@ $288.49 · 2024-11-01
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$741,996
@ $288.49 · 2024-11-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.39M
@ $276.97 · 2024-10-01
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.38M
@ $276.37 · 2024-09-03
MCINERNEY RYAN
Chief Executive Officer
$2.37M
@ $275.00 · 2024-08-29
ROTTENBERG JULIE B
General Counsel
$707,300
@ $275.00 · 2024-08-29
MAHON TULLIER KELLY
Officer
$10.12M
@ $267.64 · 2024-08-16
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives

Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.

🎭 Mr. Market's Mood

Learn more →
LHX
FearGreed
😐Neutral(44/100)

"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.
V
FearGreed
😐Neutral(57/100)

"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

Composite sentiment score based on market signals. Inspired by Buffett’s "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

⚖️ Buffett Signal

Learn more →
LHX
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Neutral (44)
V
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Neutral (57)
View LHX Full AnalysisView V Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: LHX vs V

Is L3Harris Technologies, Inc. or Visa Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, LHX trades at a 31.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $427 vs. price $295), compared to V's -7.6% margin of safety (intrinsic $304 vs. $327).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, L3Harris Technologies, Inc. or Visa Inc.?

V scores 99/100 (Wide moat), while LHX scores 59/100 (Narrow moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is L3Harris Technologies, Inc. in financial distress?

LHX's Altman Z-Score of 2.4 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. V scores 8.1 (Safe zone). The Altman Z-Score is a five-factor model that predicts insolvency within two years; scores below 1.81 indicate significant distress.

Which stock has higher return on invested capital, L3Harris Technologies, Inc. or Visa Inc.?

V earns 38.4% ROIC versus LHX's 3.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Which dividend is safer, L3Harris Technologies, Inc.'s or Visa Inc.'s?

V's dividend earns a safety score of 94/100 (Very Safe), compared to LHX's 84/100 (Very Safe). V has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.