Home Compare BWXT vs HAG.DE
Stock Comparison · Industry comparison · Aerospace & Defense

BWX Technologies vs Hensoldt: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

BWX Technologies holds the cleaner structural position, with profitability as the main driver and valuation adding further support. Hensoldt still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. On the market side, BWX Technologies is in better shape — its trend is intact while Hensoldt's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — BWX Technologies's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Peer scores are normalised within each company's primary universe (BWXT: Russell 1000, HAG.DE: STOXX 600).

Updated 2026-05-17

The clearest score difference appears in profitability. BWX Technologies, Inc. leads by 10 points on the overall comparison score.

INDUSTRY COMPARISON

Both operate in: Aerospace & Defense

This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. BWXT and HAG.DE share the same industry classification.

For a similarity-based comparison, see how BWX Technologies and Hensoldt each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.

Peer-Relative Score
BWXT
BWX Technologies, Inc.
49
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: Russell 1000
vs
HAG.DE
Hensoldt AG
39
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: STOXX 600

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: BWXT vs HAG.DE Profitability 49 22 Stability 47 52 Valuation 41 21 Growth 62 78 BWXT HAG.DE
Gap Ranking
#1 Profitability +27
#2 Valuation +20
#3 Growth +16
#4 Stability +5
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for BWXT and HAG.DE Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer BWXTHAG.DE Relative valuation Structural strength

Neither company combines the stronger profile with the cheaper valuation.

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

Entry today — historical context

Where BWXT and HAG.DE each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY BWXT Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 11 pct gap HAG.DE Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 95th 84th
BWXT (95th percentile) and HAG.DE (84th 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
Profitability
BWX Technologies, Inc. sits higher in the group on profitability, adding to the overall structural advantage.
Valuation
BWX Technologies, Inc. holds the stronger peer position on valuation.
Profitability — Dominant Gap
BWXT
49
HAG.DE
22
Gap+27in favour of BWXT

The profitability lead is mainly driven by a 11.2-point operating margin advantage.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Earnings growth also leans toward HAG.DE, which keeps the score lead from reading as a full growth sweep.

What this means for the comparison

Profitability is the clearest driver of the lead, with valuation adding further support — though growth still provides a real counterweight.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the BWXT vs HAG.DE comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Similar profitability-and-valuation comparisons

Explore how BWXT and HAG.DE 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.