Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AXON scored 44.1, TDG scored 74.9 — TDG leads.
Compare another set
AXON
Axon Enterprise, Inc.
Aerospace & Defense · Quality-Growth
44.1
$422.89 · $34.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
30.8
TDG leads
TDG
TransDigm Group Incorporated
Aerospace & Defense · Quality-Growth
74.9
$1,107.99 · $61.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestTDG33.6x
Fastest growthAXON+33.5%
Highest qualityTDG82 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
AXON
stronger →← stronger
TDG
34
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
82
96
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
83
26
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
62
TDG is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AXON
TDG
$133mC
FCF
$1.9bC+
+33.5%A
Rev
+16.6%B+
0.50B+
D/E
Negative equity
175.5xD
P/E
33.6xC+
1.52C+
PEG
3.05D
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
AXON
TDG
1405% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
54% above
>60%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~22%/yr
-95%
1-yr DCF upside
-45%
-93%
5-yr DCF upside
-35%
-90%
10-yr DCF upside
-17%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AXON
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
TDG
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
AXONAxon Enterprise, Inc.
Aerospace & Defense · $422.89 · beta 1.44
Why now
Aerospace & Defense · market cap $34.4b. Down 45% from 52-week high of $764.02 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +33% — in hypergrowth territory. 19 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $704.11 (implying +66% upside).
Moat
Moat signals from the quantitative card are modest — profitability and capital efficiency are middle-of-pack. The thesis here depends on softer factors (switching costs, brand, distribution, regulatory protection) not captured by the quality-growth screen.
Risk
Trailing P/E 175.5x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 45% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.44 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
TDGTransDigm Group Incorporated
Aerospace & Defense · $1,107.99 · beta 0.94
Why now
Aerospace & Defense · market cap $61.2b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $1463.03 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $1,448 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
Net margin 21% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. $61.2b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Trailing P/E 34x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where AXON and TDG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 30.8 points in favor of TDG. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityAXON 33.8 · TDG 82.0TDG +48.2
ValueAXON 26.3 · TDG 61.8TDG +35.5
GrowthAXON 96.2 · TDG 82.9AXON +13.3
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is TDG or AXON the better stock?
TDG scores higher: TDG 74.9, AXON 44.1 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do TDG and AXON differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where TDG leads by 48 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are TDG and AXON scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.