Home Compare ASSA-B.ST vs LHX
Stock Comparison · Structural lead, mixed market

ASSA ABLOY AB (publ) vs L3Harris Technologies: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

The structural profiles are close, with L3Harris Technologies carrying a narrow edge on stability. ASSA ABLOY AB (publ) still has the edge on stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. The market setup is currently leaning toward ASSA ABLOY AB (publ), which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with L3Harris Technologies, but the market is not currently confirming it.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Peer scores are normalised within each company's primary universe (ASSA-B.ST: STOXX 600, LHX: S&P 500).

Updated 2026-07-05

Stability points more clearly toward ASSA ABLOY AB (publ), even if the broader score still leans toward L3Harris Technologies, Inc..

Trajectory Similarity
0.76
Similar
Peer-set rank: #37
within ASSA ABLOY AB (publ)'s functional peer set

This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.

A solid similarity means the pair shares a clearly comparable long-term financial profile, even if individual dimensions still differ.

The match is driven mainly by investment intensity and recent revenue growth.

Similarity drivers
investment intensityrecent revenue growth
How to read the score
0.85–1.00 · Very similar0.70–0.84 · Similar0.55–0.69 · Moderately similarbelow 0.55 · Loose match
Peer-Relative Score
ASSA-B.ST
ASSA ABLOY AB (publ)
51
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: STOXX 600
vs
LHX
L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
54
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: S&P 500

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.

Dimension spread: ASSA-B.ST vs LHX Profitability 30 38 Stability 68 56 Valuation 56 59 Growth 59 69 ASSA-B.ST LHX
Gap Ranking
#1 Stability +12
#2 Growth +10
#3 Profitability +8
#4 Valuation +3
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for ASSA-B.ST and LHX Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer ASSA-B.STLHX Relative valuation Structural strength

The setup remains mixed because the stronger profile and the more supportive price setup do not sit on the same side.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Entry today — historical context

Where ASSA-B.ST and LHX each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY ASSA-B.ST Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 1 pct gap LHX Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 90th 91st
ASSA-B.ST (90th percentile) and LHX (91st percentile) both sit in the upper portion of their own 5-year ranges. The historical entry context is broadly similar for both. This reflects entry timing, not which company is structurally stronger.

Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Stability
Both look solid on stability, though ASSA ABLOY AB (publ) still holds the stronger peer position.
Growth
On growth, the edge still sits with L3Harris Technologies, Inc., even though both profiles look solid.
Stability — Dominant Gap
ASSA-B.ST
68
LHX
56
Gap+12in favour of ASSA-B.ST

The clearest distance comes from a steadier profile over time.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Stability is the one area where ASSA ABLOY AB (publ) still pushes back materially — it is the steadier name on this dimension, which keeps the result from reading as one-way.

What this means for the comparison

Stability answers the page question more clearly than the overall score does.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the ASSA-B.ST vs LHX comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other close comparisons

Explore how ASSA-B.ST and LHX each compare against other companies in their peer groups.

Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.

Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.

Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.

Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.