RTX vs SARO: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

Same yardstick, side by side (as of August 2026). Valuation lined up like this is most meaningful for two names in the same corner of the market, which these are. Figures are approximate; verify before investing.

Reading it: SARO is the cheaper of the two on forward earnings, but cheaper is not the same as better. Pair the valuation with growth (how far the forward P/E sits below the trailing P/E) and risk (beta) before you decide.

The metrics above tell you which is the marginally better business. The bigger risk for most people is not picking the slightly worse stock, it is over-concentrating. RTX and SARO share themes, so owning both, or adding either to what you already hold, can quietly push a large share of your portfolio into one bet.

This is the part a generic comparison page cannot answer, because it depends on what you own. Connect your brokerage and Walnut shows your real, combined RTX and SARO exposure, flags overlap with your existing positions, and tells you if adding one would tip you past a concentration you are comfortable with, read-only by default, with your login staying at your broker. Walnut is not an investment adviser.

RTX Corporation (RTX), formerly Raytheon Technologies, is one of the world's largest aerospace and defense companies. It operates three businesses. Collins Aerospace supplies avionics, interiors, actuation, and other systems for commercial and military aircraft. Pratt & Whitney designs and manufactures jet engines for airliners (including the geared turbofan) and military aircraft, and earns substantial recurring revenue from servicing its large installed engine base. Raytheon, the defense segment, builds missiles, missile defense systems (including Patriot), radars, and other advanced defense electronics for the US military and allied governments.

Full RTX guide

StandardAero (NYSE: SARO) runs engine maintenance, repair and overhaul shops for fixed and rotary wing aircraft, serving commercial airlines, business jet operators and militaries from roughly a dozen countries with about 8,000 employees. The business is organised into two reporting segments. Engine Services, which produced $5.35 billion of the $6.06 billion of fiscal 2025 revenue, takes whole engines through scheduled and unscheduled shop visits, provides on-wing and field support, and manages engine assets for lessors and operators. Component Repair Services, at $708.6 million in 2025, repairs the individual blades, vanes and cases that pass through those shops and through other people's shops, and it earns far better margins for it, 28.6% on an adjusted EBITDA basis last year against 13.2% for Engine Services. Access to the work depends on paper as much as on tooling: StandardAero holds exclusive or semi-exclusive OEM licences on platforms including the Rolls-Royce RB211-535, AE 1107, AE 2100 and AE 3007, the Honeywell HTF7000 and the Safran Arriel, and it was the first independent CFM International LEAP-1A and LEAP-1B Premier MRO provider in the Americas. By end market in 2025, commercial aerospace was $3.61 billion, business aviation $1.17 billion and military and helicopter $1.07 billion.

Full SARO guide

Both fit overlapping themes, but they are not interchangeable. The useful comparison is which set of drivers and risks you want exposure to.

• RTX drivers: Commercial aftermarket; Defense backlog and missiles.
• SARO drivers: LEAP and CFM56 Dallas reached profitability; Component Repair Services carries the margin.

A faster-growing, richer-valued name usually swings harder, so it suits a longer horizon and a higher tolerance for volatility; a steadier, more cash-generative business suits a more conservative or income-minded investor. The honest test is which set of risks you could hold through a drawdown: RTX faces program-execution risks, most visibly the Pratt & Whitney geared-turbofan powder-metal inspection issue that forced costly engine removals and weighed on cash. For SARO, the most concrete governance problem is disclosed in the company's own filings.

Growth-minded investors who believe the theme has years to run tend to accept the richer multiple for more upside; value-minded investors lean toward the cheaper forward earnings and steadier profile. Pick RTX if you believe its drivers more; SARO if you believe its. Many investors hold both, but since they share themes, that is a concentrated bet, not diversification. Decide deliberately and check overlap. For the full detail, see the RTX and SARO guides.

RTX. RTX trades as a large, dividend-paying aerospace and defense blue chip valued on its huge backlog, recurring aftermarket revenue, and dual commercial-defense exposure rather than rapid growth. Its multiple reflects steady, cash-generative franchises balanced against program-execution risk like the geared-turbofan issue, with the dividend and backlog supporting the shares.

SARO. The multiple sits below the aftermarket-heavy aerospace names investors usually anchor to, and the gap is mostly explained by three things the comparables do not carry: floating-rate leverage from the buyout, unremediated material weaknesses in financial reporting, and a private equity holder with registration rights and a quarter of the shares. Earnings quality is also a live question, because the adjusted EPS bridge now excludes amortisation of licence intangibles that the company pays real cash for, such as the $180 million fee signed in the second quarter. Read on adjusted free cash flow instead of adjusted EPS and the picture is less flattering, since the first half consumed cash and the full year target implies a large second half swing.

Headline figures (approximate, early 2026): RTX shows revenue (ttm) ~$80 billion, operating margin ~10-12%, backlog Very large (over $200 billion, commercial plus defense), net income (ttm) Several billion dollars; SARO shows revenue (ttm) ~$6.32 billion for the twelve months to June 30, 2026, up ~12.6%, against $6,062.5 million in fiscal 2025 (+15.8%), $5,237.2 million in 2024 and $4,563.3 million in 2023. Second quarter 2026 revenue was $1,599.7 million, up only 4.6%, because management is stripping out $300 million to $400 million of low-to-no-margin material pass-through revenue on restructured contracts across the year. Underlying end markets grew 5.7% in commercial aerospace and 5.6% in business aviation, while military and helicopter fell 2.6%., earnings and margins Trailing twelve month net income of ~$324.0 million and diluted EPS of ~$0.97, against $277.4 million and $0.83 in fiscal 2025 and just $11.0 million in fiscal 2024, when interest expense on the pre-IPO capital structure absorbed most of operating income. Second quarter net income was $97.3 million, up 43.7%, on a 6.1% net margin. Adjusted EBITDA was $229.9 million in the quarter, a 14.4% margin and a company record, versus $808.2 million and 13.3% for full year 2025. Adjusted diluted EPS was $0.40 against $0.32., segments and operating mix Engine Services delivered $1,405.1 million of second quarter revenue and $204.2 million of segment adjusted EBITDA at a 14.5% margin, up 130 basis points. Component Repair Services delivered $194.6 million and $51.2 million at 26.3%, down 270 basis points on weaker military volumes. Full year 2025 split the same way: Engine Services $5,354.0 million of revenue and $706.9 million of EBITDA, CRS $708.6 million and $202.7 million. By end market in 2025, commercial aerospace was $3,607.3 million, business aviation $1,173.6 million, military and helicopter $1,065.0 million and other $216.7 million., 2026 guidance Raised on August 6, 2026 to revenue of $6.375 billion to $6.5 billion (Engine Services $5.6 billion to $5.7 billion, CRS $775 million to $800 million), adjusted EBITDA of $885 million to $910 million, adjusted diluted EPS of $1.50 to $1.57, and adjusted free cash flow of $270 million to $300 million. The revenue figure is stated after the pass-through elimination. The adjusted EPS definition was broadened in the second quarter to exclude non-cash amortisation of all intangible assets, including licence intangibles, not only acquired ones, so the measure is not directly comparable with prior guidance..

RTX and SARO are related but distinct: same themes, different businesses and risks. Neither wins in the abstract; the right pick is whichever thesis you actually believe, sized so you are not over-concentrated in one theme. Walnut can show your combined RTX and SARO exposure against your real portfolio. It is not an investment adviser.