VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★

PRICE: 0 CENTS

Sunday, December 28, 2025

BAE Systems plc

BA. · London Stock Exchange

Market cap (USD)
SectorIndustrials
CountryGB
Data as of
Moat score
75/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Request update

Spot something outdated? Send a quick note and source so we can refresh this profile.

Overview

BAE Systems plc is a UK-based defence, aerospace and security contractor with five reporting segments: Electronic Systems, Platforms & Services, Air, Maritime, and Cyber & Intelligence. The core moat is relationship- and regulation-driven: long-term trusted government contracting positions, compliance barriers, and embedded roles on multi-decade programmes that support a large order backlog. Air and Electronic Systems have design-in positions on major platforms and mission systems, while Maritime benefits from scarce submarine/shipyard capacity tied to sovereign programmes. Competitive pressures include budget reprioritisation, procurement competition (especially in services), and execution risk on complex contracts.

Primary segment

Electronic Systems

Market structure

Oligopoly

Market share

HHI:

Coverage

5 segments · 10 tags

Updated 2025-12-28

Segments

Electronic Systems

Defence electronics (electronic warfare, avionics, C4ISR, space payloads and mission systems)

Revenue

26.6%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

RTXLHXNOCLMT

Platforms & Services

Land platforms, munitions and sustainment (combat vehicles, artillery systems, ammunition plants) plus naval ship repair/modernisation services

Revenue

16.3%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

GDOSKRHM.DESAAB-B.ST+2

Air

Combat air platforms, systems integration and through-life support (Typhoon, F-35 workshare, future combat air programmes, and Middle East support)

Revenue

26%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

LMTNOCBAAIR.PA+2

Maritime

Naval shipbuilding and submarines (surface combatants, nuclear submarines) and through-life support

Revenue

22.5%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

HIIGDNOCLMT+2

Cyber & Intelligence

Defence and intelligence cyber security, digital intelligence products, and mission IT/integration services

Revenue

8.6%

Structure

Competitive

Pricing

weak

Share

Peers

BAHLDOSSAICCACI+2

Moat Claims

Electronic Systems

Defence electronics (electronic warfare, avionics, C4ISR, space payloads and mission systems)

Revenue share computed from external revenue by segment in the FY2024 preliminary results announcement (Electronic Systems external revenue GBP 6,988m / Group revenue GBP 26,312m).

Oligopoly

Government Contracting Relationships

Legal

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Long-standing government customer trust and contracting track record supports wins/renewals in sensitive defence electronics and space missions.

Erosion risks

  • Budget reprioritisation by government customers
  • Contracting pressure (fixed-price risk, margin caps)
  • Technology disruption and faster refresh cycles

Leading indicators

  • US DoD/IC order intake and backlog trend
  • Win rate on recompetes and new awards
  • Program performance (schedule/cost metrics)

Counterarguments

  • Government awards are often competed and can shift with procurement priorities
  • Peers with similar clearances/capabilities can bid aggressively

Design In Qualification

Demand

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Embedded systems on major platforms create long tails and switching friction (requalification, integration, certification).

Erosion risks

  • Platform mix shifts (program cancellations/slowdowns)
  • Open-architecture initiatives that commoditise subsystems

Leading indicators

  • Installed base growth on key platforms
  • Follow-on upgrade/modernisation awards
  • Aftermarket and sustainment revenue mix

Counterarguments

  • Open mission systems can enable easier vendor substitution over time
  • Prime contractors may dual-source to reduce dependence

Compliance Advantage

Legal

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Proven compliance with export controls, sanctions and classified handling is a prerequisite for many programmes and can be a barrier to entry.

Erosion risks

  • Regulatory changes (export controls, sanctions) limiting addressable markets
  • Compliance failures leading to penalties/debarment

Leading indicators

  • Audit findings, remediation costs, and enforcement actions
  • Changes in export licensing timelines/approvals

Counterarguments

  • Large peers also have mature compliance systems; advantage may be table stakes
  • Regulation can raise costs and slow execution

Platforms & Services

Land platforms, munitions and sustainment (combat vehicles, artillery systems, ammunition plants) plus naval ship repair/modernisation services

Revenue share computed from external revenue by segment in the FY2024 preliminary results announcement (Platforms & Services external revenue GBP 4,288m / Group revenue GBP 26,312m).

Oligopoly

Service Field Network

Supply

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence

Specialised sustainment footprint (shipyards, depots, GOCO plants) supports recurring work and makes switching providers operationally difficult.

Erosion risks

  • Government insourcing or competitive re-tendering of sustainment work
  • Capacity additions by competitors near key ports/bases

Leading indicators

  • Ship repair backlog and utilisation in key home ports
  • Recompete win rate on sustainment contracts
  • Capex into new yard/depot capacity

Counterarguments

  • Sustainment can be competed and repriced, limiting long-term excess returns
  • Government customers may diversify suppliers to reduce dependency

Long Term Contracts

Demand

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Multi-year production and sustainment awards provide visibility and reduce near-term demand volatility.

Erosion risks

  • Program cancellations or quantity reductions
  • Fixed-price exposure and cost inflation

Leading indicators

  • Option exercises and contract extensions
  • Cost/schedule performance on key vehicle programmes
  • US supplemental funding trends for munitions

Counterarguments

  • Follow-on funding still depends on annual appropriations
  • Competition can intensify at re-tender points

Government Contracting Relationships

Legal

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Trusted relationships with defence customers support large awards and task orders across vehicles, artillery and munitions facilities.

Erosion risks

  • Political change affecting procurement priorities
  • Performance issues leading to lower award fees or lost recompetes

Leading indicators

  • Order intake trend in Platforms & Services
  • On-time delivery and quality metrics
  • Audit findings and award fee outcomes

Counterarguments

  • Large primes and specialist OEMs compete aggressively for US Army and US Navy programmes
  • Some platforms (e.g., armoured vehicles) are subject to price-driven bidding

Air

Combat air platforms, systems integration and through-life support (Typhoon, F-35 workshare, future combat air programmes, and Middle East support)

Revenue share computed from external revenue by segment in the FY2024 preliminary results announcement (Air external revenue GBP 6,840m / Group revenue GBP 26,312m).

Oligopoly

Design In Qualification

Demand

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Deep workshare on flagship platforms (e.g., F-35 structures and sustainment) creates long program tails and costly supplier transitions.

Erosion risks

  • Platform production rate cuts or program reprioritisation
  • Workshare renegotiation or competitive sourcing
  • Geopolitical/export restrictions affecting deliveries

Leading indicators

  • F-35 lot awards and global production rate
  • Typhoon production/support contract wins
  • Sustainment volumes and retrofit/upgrade awards

Counterarguments

  • Prime OEMs can re-source structures over time if economics shift
  • Future platforms could reduce demand for legacy jets and structures

Long Term Contracts

Demand

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Long-standing support contracts in the Middle East and Europe provide recurring services revenue and stickiness.

Erosion risks

  • Renegotiation/termination risk tied to diplomatic relations
  • Localisation requirements shifting work in-country

Leading indicators

  • Renewal/extension of KSA support contracts
  • In-Kingdom Industrial Participation progress
  • Services margin and cash conversion trend

Counterarguments

  • Support contracts can be politically sensitive and re-tendered
  • Customers can demand greater localisation, reducing margin and control

Capex Knowhow Scale

Supply

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence

Combat-air design/development and certification require scarce engineering talent, facilities and programme management capabilities.

Erosion risks

  • Cost overruns and schedule delays on development programmes
  • Shifts toward unmanned systems changing requirements

Leading indicators

  • GCAP contract milestones and funding commitments
  • R&D spend and hiring in combat air engineering
  • Customer satisfaction on delivery milestones

Counterarguments

  • A small number of global primes share similar capabilities; excess returns depend on contract terms
  • Government customers may split work to preserve competition and national interests

Maritime

Naval shipbuilding and submarines (surface combatants, nuclear submarines) and through-life support

Revenue share computed from external revenue by segment in the FY2024 preliminary results announcement (Maritime external revenue GBP 5,915m / Group revenue GBP 26,312m).

Oligopoly

Capacity Moat

Supply

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Specialised shipyard/submarine industrial capacity and workforce are hard to replicate and create high barriers to entry in sovereign naval programmes.

Erosion risks

  • Programme delays, cost overruns, or quality issues
  • Workforce and supplier bottlenecks
  • Policy shifts toward alternative platform strategies

Leading indicators

  • Submarine and surface ship programme milestone delivery vs plan
  • Order backlog in Maritime segment
  • Skilled labour hiring/retention and supplier readiness

Counterarguments

  • Cost-plus structures can cap upside if efficiencies are shared with the customer
  • Governments may intervene heavily, reducing commercial leverage

Long Term Contracts

Demand

Strength: 5/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Naval platform programmes often run for decades, providing long-duration revenue visibility once in execution.

Erosion risks

  • Annual appropriations/funding pauses
  • Renegotiations driven by political pressure

Leading indicators

  • Funded vs unfunded backlog trend
  • Government budget allocations for naval programmes
  • Contract modifications and re-baselining events

Counterarguments

  • Long programmes can be low-margin if bid aggressively or if execution issues arise
  • Inflation and supply chain shocks can erode profitability on fixed-price elements

Government Contracting Relationships

Legal

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Deep relationship with sovereign customers supports repeat awards for combat systems, submarines and fleet infrastructure.

Erosion risks

  • Political change or industrial strategy shifts
  • Performance issues reducing trust/award fees

Leading indicators

  • UK MoD and Australia NDS/AUKUS contracting cadence
  • Recompete outcomes on support contracts
  • Customer satisfaction and safety performance

Counterarguments

  • Sovereign customers can split work to preserve competition and leverage
  • International competition for surface ships remains intense

Cyber & Intelligence

Defence and intelligence cyber security, digital intelligence products, and mission IT/integration services

Revenue share computed from external revenue by segment in the FY2024 preliminary results announcement (Cyber & Intelligence external revenue GBP 2,271m / Group revenue GBP 26,312m).

Competitive

Compliance Advantage

Legal

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Ability to operate in national-security environments (clearances, secure delivery) is a prerequisite that limits entrants.

Erosion risks

  • Talent shortages increasing delivery risk
  • Policy changes affecting access to classified work

Leading indicators

  • Staff clearance pipeline and retention
  • Security incident metrics and audit outcomes
  • Bid pipeline and recompete success rate

Counterarguments

  • Large services peers have similar clearances and can compete on price
  • Government customers can shift work to in-house teams or other integrators

Government Contracting Relationships

Legal

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

Established relationships with US DoD and other agencies support task orders and pipeline continuity.

Erosion risks

  • Procurement delays and budget uncertainty
  • Recompete losses on major contract vehicles

Leading indicators

  • US federal procurement cycle timing (award delays)
  • Order intake/backlog trend in the segment
  • Customer satisfaction scores and CPARS ratings (where available)

Counterarguments

  • The company notes the US defence services market is highly competitive
  • Agency priorities can shift quickly, reducing continuity of task orders

Switching Costs General

Demand

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence

Mission-critical integration work can create operational switching costs (knowledge of systems, accreditation, and continuity requirements).

Erosion risks

  • Standardised cloud/platform tools reducing differentiation
  • Commoditisation of IT services and increased competition

Leading indicators

  • Renewal rates on major programmes
  • Mix shift toward higher-value proprietary products vs labour-based services
  • Gross margin trend in the segment

Counterarguments

  • Service contracts can be re-bid frequently, keeping switching costs limited
  • Customers can modularise work to avoid vendor lock-in

Evidence

other
BAE Systems plc Preliminary Results Announcement 2024

government customers have trusted us for decades to develop the next generation of defence and security capabilities.

Management frames long-term government trust as a core advantage, relevant to classified/sensitive electronics work.

other
BAE Systems plc Preliminary Results Announcement 2024

for a cumulative total of over 1,600 EW systems as at year end.

Large installed base on a flagship platform implies sustained support/upgrade demand and high switching costs.

other
BAE Systems plc Preliminary Results Announcement 2024

operate under tight regulation and complying fully with applicable trade controls and sanctions.

Highlights regulatory intensity; incumbents with mature compliance systems face less friction winning/performing.

other
BAE Systems plc Preliminary Results Announcement 2024

delivers services and sustainment activities, including US naval ship repair

Segment description highlights on-the-ground sustainment infrastructure that underpins service density.

other
BAE Systems plc Preliminary Results Announcement 2024

provide repair and maintenance services for the Danish Army's CV90s over a 15-year period

Illustrative example of long-duration defence service contracting within the segment.

Showing 5 of 16 sources.

Risks & Indicators

Erosion risks

  • Budget reprioritisation by government customers
  • Contracting pressure (fixed-price risk, margin caps)
  • Technology disruption and faster refresh cycles
  • Platform mix shifts (program cancellations/slowdowns)
  • Open-architecture initiatives that commoditise subsystems
  • Regulatory changes (export controls, sanctions) limiting addressable markets

Leading indicators

  • US DoD/IC order intake and backlog trend
  • Win rate on recompetes and new awards
  • Program performance (schedule/cost metrics)
  • Installed base growth on key platforms
  • Follow-on upgrade/modernisation awards
  • Aftermarket and sustainment revenue mix
Created 2025-12-28
Updated 2025-12-28

Curation & Accuracy

This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).

Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.