The governments of the West are once again at war
According to Terry Tanaka, investors should also be ready.
The way that investors perceive defense stocks is evolving. They are beginning to be perceived as true growth companies rather than as sluggish, stumbling enterprises. Over the past three years, this change has caused share prices to rise sharply, making defense one of the market's strongest segments. The question is whether the companies that supply military clients can live up to these higher standards and whether this enthusiasm is warranted.
Investors anticipated a decline in international defense spending for many years following the end of the Cold War. Large standing armies were abandoned in favor of social programs and welfare. For many years, the defense sector was hindered by this alleged peace dividend. That time frame has now ended. Growing geopolitical tension has compelled Western governments to reconsider security, as evidenced by China's growing pressure on its neighbors and Russia's ongoing aggression. This is a long-term commitment to improved deterrence and modernization rather than a brief increase in spending. It entails a prolonged period of high activity throughout the defense supply chain, long-term contracts, and consistent demand for technology and equipment.
Public finances already reflect the magnitude of this change. Western governments are enacting legislation that increases defense spending, converting policy objectives into legally binding budgetary commitments. By emphasizing cutting-edge machinery and long-term preparedness, these plans make a compelling investment case for the industry. For businesses that supply vital systems and components via air, land, and sea, the prospect of stable long-term growth is supported by the renewed need for scale, uniform standards, and quicker delivery.
Geopolitical underpinnings of rearmament.
Following the end of the Cold War, the world entered a brief and unique period. The US was the only superpower starting in 1991, and Western political and economic concepts quickly gained traction. However, outside of the Western alliance, this purported "liberal international order" never really took hold. The 2008 financial crisis exposed the weakness of its foundations. Trust in reputable institutions and leaders was destroyed by that crisis. Wealth was destroyed by the subsequent severe recession, which resulted in years of slow growth. As people started to associate the US-led system with instability and inequality, disillusionment with globalization fueled the rise of nationalism and populism. The ideal of a seamless, international economy began to seem naive.
China was largely spared the consequences. Its economy continued to grow, and its proportion of the world's output increased from about 6% in 2007 to about 20% today. Because of its tenacity, China's state-driven model gained new respect both domestically and internationally. Beijing saw an opportunity when Lehman Brothers collapsed, demonstrating the boundaries of US power. China became more self-assured and assertive on the international scene when the US was on the defensive.
Global divides have widened since then. China has developed its own network of power through political and economic endeavors. Originally marketed as a trade initiative, the Belt and Road Initiative has evolved into a strategic instrument involving over 150 nations. It coexists with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Brics group of nations, and the Global Security Initiative, all of which provide alliances free from the political conditions of Western investment and aid.
As for the US, it has become more inwardly focused. It has reduced its presence in Europe and the Middle East to concentrate on the Indo-Pacific, burdened by inequality and unending international obligations. As a result, allies have been compelled to increase defense spending, which has made the world more divided and heavily armed rather than more stable. Beijing and Washington's rivalry now involves more than just trade or power. The next global order, in which countries prioritize security and resilience over the efficiency that once characterized the post-Cold War era, is a struggle over whose values will define it.
The arms race by the West.
Large-scale deterrence against peer rivals is replacing expeditionary operations in the defense strategy of Western countries. Smaller forces are sent to far-off theaters as part of expeditionary operations, like the 2011 NATO-led air and naval mission in Libya to enforce a no-fly zone. In order to stop a major world power from attacking, the new emphasis on large-scale deterrence entails developing enormous, advanced capabilities. NATO's Steadfast Defender drills, which evaluate the quick movement of tens of thousands of soldiers throughout Europe, serve as an example of this. As a result of this shift, allied countries have made strong, long-term spending commitments in order to swiftly close military capability gaps.
This change has been formalized by NATO. Members were required to allocate at least 2% of GDP to defense in the initial 2014 Defence Investment Pledge. Members of NATO decided to increase that to 3.5 percent of GDP by 2035 at the 2025 summit. This gives defense contractors' revenue outlook a solid and long-lasting basis.
Spending in Britain is increasing due to the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) and the nuclear deterrent. In addition to being a major participant in the Aukus agreement, which will provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines, the UK is supervising the delivery of Dreadnought nuclear submarines. These are enormous, multi-decade projects that support the sector's industrial foundation.
One of the biggest policy reversals has been made by Germany. It declared a special defense fund of £100 billion in 2022. Rebuilding land forces after decades of underinvestment is the main goal of the funds. In order to develop a new generation of European battle tanks, Germany and France are collaborating on the Main Ground Combat System project.
The United States still spends more on defense than any other country. Faster modernization and production are now the goals of its budget. The army is developing the new M1E3 Abrams tank as part of its Next Generation Combat Vehicle program. Through the Foreign Military Sales program, which secures long-term maintenance contracts for platforms like the F-35 fighter jet, it also controls the world arms market.
Japan is a significant player as well. Due to increasing pressure from China, it is making significant investments in cutting-edge machinery. As a major industrial partner in GCAP, Japan is collaborating with Italy and Britain on a sixth-generation fighter. Additionally, the nation is creating long-range strike systems, which clearly deviates from its post-war emphasis on self-defense.
France is still dedicated to upholding a robust and autonomous defense industry. Its naval and aerospace sectors are essential to Europe's strategic base, and it is still collaborating with Germany on the Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) project. Although these initiatives have lengthy timelines, they serve as a foundation for industrial cooperation throughout the continent.
Defense stocks are in a good position to profit.
Which defense stocks an investor owned hasn't mattered in the past few years because almost all of them have increased significantly. However, businesses with the most consistent revenue will have the advantage in the future. Owning generational platforms and offering crucial support services are the sources of this strength.
The backbone of the UK defense sector, BAE Systems (LSE: BA) ensures the country's nuclear future. With a record order backlog of 75.4 billion, the company is more than twice as large as it was ten years ago. The naval nuclear franchise, particularly the SSN-Aukus and Dreadnought submarine programs, is its main long-term source of income. BAE is making large investments in its Barrow-in-Furness facilities in order to double capacity and guarantee production volume for many years. Additionally, it successfully increased its already substantial exposure to the thriving US defense market through the acquisition of Ball Aerospace. Only 25% of BAE's revenue comes from the UK; nearly half comes from the US. BAE is a multifaceted international company. Saudi Arabia, its third-largest market, could pose the greatest threat if the nation is drawn closer to China's sphere of influence and under pressure to consider purchasing Chinese military hardware.
Because of its unmatched proficiency in naval nuclear propulsion, Rolls-Royce Holdings (LSE: RR), which is about one-third exposed to defense, is strategically vital. Rolls-Royce Submarines will provide all of the nuclear reactors for Australia's new SSN-Aukus submarines as well as the nuclear propulsion plant for the UK's entire fleet of nuclear submarines. This offers a vital, long-term franchise essential to the strategic nuclear partnership between the US and the UK. The defense segment of Rolls-Royce aims for a midterm operating margin of between 14 and 16 percent, but the division is bolstered by the civil aerospace division, which recently reported an operating margin of nearly 25 percent. The substantial capital expenditures required by the Aukus project are financed by this strong commercial cash flow.
Long-term support contracts are the main focus of Babcock International Group (LSE: BAB), especially for its nuclear and marine divisions. The company serves as the UK Royal Navy's Type 31 frigate prime contractor. More significantly, its Arrowhead 140 frigate design is now profitable. Poland and Indonesia have already awarded the ship export contracts, which will significantly boost profits. Through long-term support and facility-management contracts across UK nuclear-licensed sites, the Cavendish Nuclear arm generates extremely consistent revenue streams. The margin volatility linked to high-risk platform development is reduced by this emphasis on long-term services.
Technology and testing services are at the core of Qinetiq Group PLC's (LSE: QQ) distinctive low-risk business model. The Long-Term Partnering Agreement with the UK Ministry of Defence, which was recently extended for an additional five years to 2033, is the foundation of its financial future. The testing and assessment of future capabilities, such as GCAP and cutting-edge weaponry, are covered by this £1.5 billion extension. Earnings from the service-based revenue structure are predictable.
Melrose Industriess (LSE: MRO) now has defense exposure in its structures division, which provides airframe components, as a result of its restructuring. In this category, 34% of US revenue comes from defense. By 2029, the structures division is expected to have an operating margin in the low teens thanks to management's persistent efforts to increase margins. As a major component supplier, Melrose is renegotiating long-term contracts and converting higher volumes into higher profits by taking advantage of strong demand and inflation.
A significant high-volume defense stock for ammunition and land defense in Europe is Rheinmetall (Frankfurt: RHM). The company has recently reported an increase in defense sales, with a focus on the weapons and ammunition division and vehicle systems. With the help of strategic investments to build new capacity throughout Europe, management anticipates consolidated sales growth of 25% to 30% in the 2025 fiscal year. Rheinmetalls' ammunition division is making extremely high profits thanks to scarcity. It is ideally positioned to take a sizable portion of NATO Europe's equipment budget.
Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT), the largest defense contractor in the world, possesses important strategic platforms like the F-35 and Aegis systems. Platforms that define the next generation of warfare are structurally essential to its business. Nonetheless, fixed-price (FFP) contractual risk could affect the company. Here, the business runs the risk of experiencing large cost overruns. In defense contracting, program charges are typical; Lockheed Martin has suffered greatly as a result of them recently. This volatility serves as a reminder that although sales volume is certain, earnings are not. Lockheed Martin is one of the two shares (along with L3Harris) that have underperformed despite the rise in business since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine war. However, it is arguably one of the most affordable and varied ways to learn about defense trends.
Missile systems, air defense, and naval programs are the areas of expertise for RTX Corporation (formerly Raytheon Technologies, NYSE: RTX). As Western-aligned countries support Ukraine, RTX is profiting from a reduction in missile stocks. Major awards have been won by the missiles division for systems like Amraam and Stinger. RTX has non-defense exposure, just like a lot of defense firms. This is accomplished through its Pratt and Whitney commercial jet engines, which are a significant rival of Rolls-Royces. Although it serves as a financial safety net, the stability offered by its commercial aerospace segments reduces the overall impact of defense spending.
Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC) specializes in strategic deterrence initiatives, including the Sentinel Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) and the B-21 Raider bomber. With a backlog spanning decades, it currently stands at over £90 billion. Production acceleration is anticipated by management to result in a notable increase in sales. Similar to Lockheed Martin, Northrop must deal with the risks associated with FFP execution, but in order to maintain long-term dominance, it is making calculated decisions to forgo short-term profits on early B-21 production.
With both defense and non-defense divisions, General Dynamics Corporation (NYSE: GD) is a multifaceted company. It is divided into four divisions of comparable sizes: aerospace (Gulfstream), technology (defense information systems), combat systems (land), and marine systems (submarines). Contracts for the Piranha and Ascod vehicles were secured by the combat systems segment, which is the main beneficiary of European land rearmament. The company's highly profitable Gulfstream private-jet business and defense both contribute to the expansion of its overall operating margin.
Command, control, computers, communications, cyber, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C5ISR), and space systems are the areas of expertise for L3Harris Technologies (NYSE: LHX). When comparing orders received to orders delivered, the company's outstanding book-to-bill ratio was 1.5 times, indicating an acceleration of demand. Priority should be given to high-demand, high-margin technology rather than outdated legacy manufacturing. Allied budgets that support integrated, multi-domain operations are compatible with this strategy. The company was created in 2019 through the merger of two competitors, and while the stock hasn't yet lived up to expectations, things are starting to look better.
Digital warfare and technology are introduced at Thales (Paris: HO). The French government owns 25% of the company. The French government views this complicated enterprise as strategically significant. With significant investments in fields like cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, and quantum technology, Thales is both a technology company and a defense enterprise. It also manufactures short-range missile systems and avionics for aircraft.
Being aware of the dangers.
Demand for defense is safe, but it carries some risks. Fortunately, government planning and long-term contracts largely offset these. The first risk is financial in nature. Western governments have limited funds. The UK has set a challenging new defense target of 3.5 percent of GDP. Maintaining this goal is difficult due to high debt levels and aging populations. Long-term agreements, however, allay this worry. Aukus and GCAP are examples of long-lasting programs. Governments sign decades-long contracts for production and development, and they commit to infrastructure. These contracts guarantee contractors consistent income even in the event of temporary budget cuts.
The evolving nature of warfare is the source of the second risk. Drones, cyberthreats, and technological espionage are starting to be the main points of contention. Spending nowadays frequently focuses on conventional platforms like ships and tanks, which might not be able to handle novel, unconventional threats. Regardless of the platform's efficacy, listed businesses profit from guaranteed spending. This funding is secured by long-term government defense plans, which safeguard Western and UK-aligned businesses. The public's opinion is the third risk. Public support may decline if governments raise taxes to finance both military might and welfare. Defense companies may be impacted by this political obstacle if future budgets are postponed or cut.
However, this presents a unique opportunity for defense companies, which are experiencing levels of consistent growth not seen in nearly 40 years. For those looking for widespread exposure, BAE Systems is the clear choice. Although it is no longer as inexpensive as it once was, it still offers exposure to both US and UK defense expenditures. It has contracts that could last for decades and operates in a wide range of product categories. Lockheed Martin, the largest defense company in the world, offers a discount to the industry for those seeking a more affordable business. It is the purest method of getting exposure to the US defense budget, but it necessitates that investors look past the issues brought on by the fixed-price contracts.
Babcock provides exposure to long-term support contracts, which are essential for the upkeep of facilities and programs. Lastly, L3Harris has had some difficulty lately due to problems brought on by its merger, but it appears that these issues are behind it. If that is the case, earnings growth may be even faster than that of the other defense stocks.
Leave a comment on: The war dividend: how to purchase defense-related stocks as the world gets more armed