As investors, we always want our investments to generate a healthy return. However, investors often forget that returns stem from two, not one, extremely important factors:

  1. The business' ability to generate profits.
  2. The price you pay for one share of those profits.

This idea of price versus returns provides the bedrock for the approach known as value investing. In this series, I'll examine a specific business from both a quality and pricing standpoint. In doing so, I hope to provide a better sense of its potential as an investment right now.

Where should we start to find value?
As we all know, the quality of businesses varies widely. A company that has the ability to grow its bottom line faster (or much faster) than the market, especially with any consistency, gives its owner greater value than a stagnant or declining business (duh!). However, many investors also fail to understand that any business becomes a buy at a low enough price. Figuring out this price-to-value equation drives all intelligent investment research.

To do so today, I selected several metrics that will evaluate returns, profitability, growth, and leverage. These make for some of the most important aspects to consider when researching a potential investment.

  • Return on equity divides net income by shareholder equity, highlighting the return a company generates for its equity base.
  • The EBIT (short for earnings before interest and taxes) margin provides a rough measurement of the percentage of cash a company keeps from its operations. I prefer using EBIT over other measurements because it focuses more exclusively on the performance of a company's core business. Stripping out interest and taxes makes these figures less susceptible to dubious accounting distortions.
  • The EBIT growth rate demonstrates whether a company can expand its business.
  • Finally, the debt-to-equity ratio reveals how much leverage a company employs to fund its operations. Some companies have a track record of wisely managing high debt levels. Generally speaking, though, the lower the better for this figure. I chose to use five-year averages to help smooth away one-year irregularities that can easily distort regular business results.  

Keeping all that in mind, let's take a look at United Technologies (NYSE: UTX) and some of its closest peers. 


Return on Equity (5-Year Average)

EBIT Margin (5-Year Average)

EBIT Growth (5-Year Average)

Total Debt / Equity

United Technologies 22.76% 13.16% 8.48% 44.73%
Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC) 7.69% 8.56% 7.74% 31.38%
Raytheon (NYSE: RTN) 15.96% 10.96% 10.85% 35.92%
General Dynamics (NYSE: GD) 20.57% 11.69% 12.87% 23.08%

Source: Capital IQ, a division of Standard & Poor's.

Conservatively financed, all of these companies have safe capital structures. United Technologies leads the field with the highest average return on equity and operating margin over the past five years -- certainly both pluses. It also has a fair growth element at work.

Northrop lagged the pack over the past five years in every performance measurement here. However, it could find itself in a stronger position going forward. The company recently spun off its low-margin ship-building unit, which now operates as Huntington Ingalls Industries. Northrop also used the spinoff to eliminate some long-term debt. But don't expect the move to completely change the company's economics, either.

Raytheon generated a healthy ROE over the past half-decade. It also enjoyed fair margins and relatively strong growth. 

General Dynamics also looks relatively impressive. It sports an above-average historical ROE, fair margins, and the best growth out of the companies here.

How cheap does United Technologies look?
To look at pricing, I've chosen to examine two important multiples: price-to-earnings and enterprise value-to-free cash flow. Similar to a P/E ratio, enterprise value (essentially debt, preferred stock, and equity holders combined minus cash) to unlevered free cash flow conveys how expensive the entire company is versus the cash it can generate. The resulting figure gives investors another measurement of cheapness when analyzing a stock. For both metrics, the lower the multiple, the better.

Let's check this performance against the price we'll need to pay to get our hands on some of the company's stock.


Enterprise Value / FCF

P / LTM Diluted EPS Before Extra Items

United Technologies 16.56 17.54
Northrop Grumman 9.10 9.13
Raytheon 13.76 10.90
General Dynamics 9.96 10.29

Source: Capital IQ, a division of Standard & Poor's.

The overall bearishness surrounding defense spending really shows through here. UTX looks appreciably more expensive than the other companies here, and deservedly so. It clearly has the most diverse business model out of these contractors, including significant manufacturing exposure. All three other companies look dirt-cheap on paper.

Investing in any of these companies (but especially Northrop, Raytheon, and GD) mostly depends on your more industrywide opinions. Defense contractors live and die based on their ability to secure lucrative government contracts. With most observers expecting this figure to get nuked between increasing austerity measures and the winding down of overseas operations, the entire industry is priced for revenues to decline significantly. However, arguments to the contrary also exist. Depending on your personal view of the world, some of these stocks could make for potential contrarian plays.

Although United Technologies might look like a stock for your portfolio right now, the search doesn't end here. To really get to know a company, you need to keep digging. If any of the companies I've mentioned here today piques your interest, further examining quality of earnings, management track records, or analyst estimates all make for great ways to continue your search. You can also stop by The Motley Fool's CAPS page, where our users come to share their ideas and chat about their favorite stocks. Or you can add the stocks mentioned here to My Watchlist.