Defense Stocks Trade In Line With Market as Political Risk Fades
Lockheed Martin trades at 16.41 times forward earnings, a full three points below the S&P 500, even as its order backlog sits at an all-time high. Northrop Grumman and RTX show similar discounts. The sector isn't cheap because demand is weak. It's cheap because Wall Street is pricing in a legislative delay that already didn't happen.
The 2024 midterms produced a Republican House and a narrowly divided Senate. No Blue Wave materialized. Yet defense primes continue to trade as though appropriations gridlock is imminent, stuck in a valuation pattern that made sense eighteen months ago and makes no sense now.
The Gridlock That Wasn't
Investors built the discount around a specific fear: that a Democratic sweep would stall the National Defense Authorization Act, force the Pentagon onto continuing resolutions, and redirect spending from hardware procurement toward climate resiliency and personnel benefits. The logic was sound. A divided Congress historically takes longer to pass the NDAA, and when Democrats control appropriations, the funding mix shifts. Ships and tanks lose share to cyber defense and troop welfare.
Except the 2024 election delivered divided government of a different kind. Republicans hold the House Appropriations Committee. The Senate Armed Services Committee has a narrow Democratic majority but faces pressure from moderate members in Virginia and Connecticut, states where defense manufacturing employs tens of thousands. The political composition now favors hardware spending, not the pivot away from it that the market priced in.
The Department of Defense requested roughly $850 billion for fiscal 2025. The 2026 projection faces potential caps from bipartisan debt-ceiling negotiations. The stall everyone feared was legislative. What we got instead was arithmetic: interest payments on federal debt are eating discretionary budgets across the board, defense included. That's a different problem with a different timeline.
Why the Discount Persists
Defense stocks dip reliably in the six months before midterms. The pattern is old enough that you can backtest it. What's unusual this time is that the dip hasn't corrected. The Big Five contractors, Lockheed, RTX, Northrop, Boeing, General Dynamics, still trade at 14x to 16x forward earnings, levels consistent with anticipated appropriations chaos.
The gap suggests the market is pricing something other than the current Congress. One explanation: investors expect the 2026 cycle to deliver the wave that didn't come in 2024. That's a political bet, not a funding bet, and it's being made fifteen months early.
Another: ESG mandates continue to create a structural ceiling. Institutional funds bound by environmental, social, and governance screens often exclude aerospace and defense, which limits the buyer base regardless of valuation. The Big Five rely on the U.S. government for 50% to 90% of annual revenue. That concentration makes them unattractive to funds looking for diversified exposure, even when the government in question is spending at record levels.
A third: antitrust scrutiny under the current FTC has made it harder for defense primes to grow through acquisition. Without M&A, growth comes from winning competitions against each other or expanding foreign military sales. Both are slower paths than buying a sub-tier supplier and consolidating margin.
What Actually Changed
The geopolitical floor moved. European NATO members are placing multi-year munitions orders. AUKUS commitments from Australia lock in submarine work through the 2040s. Foreign Military Sales reached $104.38 billion in fiscal 2025, a decline from the prior year's record, though total arms sales including direct commercial channels remained elevated and are projected higher in 2026. The export channel now hedges domestic political risk in a way it didn't five years ago.
Congress did eventually pass an omnibus spending bill during the 2024 lame-duck session, a massive authorization that included full-year defense funding and new-start programs. The market barely noticed. The stocks rallied briefly in December and then gave it all back by March.
Defense stocks are trading on a political scenario from 2023. The actual Congress, the actual appropriations calendar, and the actual order backlog all point somewhere else. The gap won't close until the market stops pricing the election it expected and starts pricing the one it got.
Lockheed Martin trades at 16.41 times forward earnings, a full three points below the S&P 500, even as its order backlog sits at an all-time high. Northrop Grumman and RTX show similar discounts. The sector isn't cheap because demand is weak. It's cheap because Wall Street is pricing in a legislative delay that already didn't happen.
The 2024 midterms produced a Republican House and a narrowly divided Senate. No Blue Wave materialized. Yet defense primes continue to trade as though appropriations gridlock is imminent, stuck in a valuation pattern that made sense eighteen months ago and makes no sense now.
The Gridlock That Wasn't
Investors built the discount around a specific fear: that a Democratic sweep would stall the National Defense Authorization Act, force the Pentagon onto continuing resolutions, and redirect spending from hardware procurement toward climate resiliency and personnel benefits. The logic was sound. A divided Congress historically takes longer to pass the NDAA, and when Democrats control appropriations, the funding mix shifts. Ships and tanks lose share to cyber defense and troop welfare.
Except the 2024 election delivered divided government of a different kind. Republicans hold the House Appropriations Committee. The Senate Armed Services Committee has a narrow Democratic majority but faces pressure from moderate members in Virginia and Connecticut, states where defense manufacturing employs tens of thousands. The political composition now favors hardware spending, not the pivot away from it that the market priced in.
The Department of Defense requested roughly $850 billion for fiscal 2025. The 2026 projection faces potential caps from bipartisan debt-ceiling negotiations. The stall everyone feared was legislative. What we got instead was arithmetic: interest payments on federal debt are eating discretionary budgets across the board, defense included. That's a different problem with a different timeline.
Why the Discount Persists
Defense stocks dip reliably in the six months before midterms. The pattern is old enough that you can backtest it. What's unusual this time is that the dip hasn't corrected. The Big Five contractors, Lockheed, RTX, Northrop, Boeing, General Dynamics, still trade at 14x to 16x forward earnings, levels consistent with anticipated appropriations chaos.
The gap suggests the market is pricing something other than the current Congress. One explanation: investors expect the 2026 cycle to deliver the wave that didn't come in 2024. That's a political bet, not a funding bet, and it's being made fifteen months early.
Another: ESG mandates continue to create a structural ceiling. Institutional funds bound by environmental, social, and governance screens often exclude aerospace and defense, which limits the buyer base regardless of valuation. The Big Five rely on the U.S. government for 50% to 90% of annual revenue. That concentration makes them unattractive to funds looking for diversified exposure, even when the government in question is spending at record levels.
A third: antitrust scrutiny under the current FTC has made it harder for defense primes to grow through acquisition. Without M&A, growth comes from winning competitions against each other or expanding foreign military sales. Both are slower paths than buying a sub-tier supplier and consolidating margin.
What Actually Changed
The geopolitical floor moved. European NATO members are placing multi-year munitions orders. AUKUS commitments from Australia lock in submarine work through the 2040s. Foreign Military Sales reached $104.38 billion in fiscal 2025, a decline from the prior year's record, though total arms sales including direct commercial channels remained elevated and are projected higher in 2026. The export channel now hedges domestic political risk in a way it didn't five years ago.
Congress did eventually pass an omnibus spending bill during the 2024 lame-duck session, a massive authorization that included full-year defense funding and new-start programs. The market barely noticed. The stocks rallied briefly in December and then gave it all back by March.
Defense stocks are trading on a political scenario from 2023. The actual Congress, the actual appropriations calendar, and the actual order backlog all point somewhere else. The gap won't close until the market stops pricing the election it expected and starts pricing the one it got.
Sources
Read Next
CMHC's Latest Housing Supply Gap Report Shows Construction Slowing Faster Than Demand
Birch Hill builds a regional aviation network in British Columbia through Harbour Air's Pacific Coastal acquisition
South Korea's Stock Market Has Become a National Liability
Tech CEOs Walk the Investor Tightrope: Signal AI Risk Without Cutting Off Billions in Funding