★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★

Checking

L3Harris Technologies, Inc.

LHX · NYSE

Market cap (USD)$54.7B
SectorIndustrials
IndustryAerospace & Defense
CountryUS
Data as of
Moat score
72/ 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Spot something outdated?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

L3Harris Technologies is a U.S. defense technology contractor that realigned into three segments at the start of fiscal 2026: Space & Mission Systems, Communication & Spectrum Dominance, and Missile Solutions. The moat is anchored in U.S. government procurement relationships, designed-in classified and mission-system content, secure communications interoperability, and scarce solid rocket motor capacity. Q1 2026 orders of $7.8 billion lifted backlog to $40.7 billion, while Missile Solutions is gaining strategic importance through proposed DoW investment and major capacity expansions. Key risks are budget timing, recompetes, execution on capacity ramps, fixed-price cost pressure, and government efforts to add competing suppliers.

Primary segment

Space & Mission Systems

Market structure

Oligopoly

Market share

HHI:

Coverage

3 segments · 8 tags

Updated 2026-07-01

Segments

Space & Mission Systems

Classified and international ISR, missionized aircraft, space payloads, mission networks, maritime systems and electronic warfare integration

Revenue

51.2%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

LMTNOCRTXBA+3

Communication & Spectrum Dominance

Secure tactical communications, resilient waveforms, broadband networks, night vision, datalinks and electronic warfare

Revenue

31.8%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

RTXNOCLMTBA+3

Missile Solutions

Solid rocket motors, missile propulsion, armament, fuzing, space propulsion and advanced munitions capacity

Revenue

17%

Structure

Duopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

NOCLMTRTXBA+1

Moat Claims

Space & Mission Systems

Classified and international ISR, missionized aircraft, space payloads, mission networks, maritime systems and electronic warfare integration

Revenue and operating-profit shares use Q1 2026 gross segment revenue and segment operating income before intersegment elimination and corporate/unallocated items. The segment was created in the fiscal 2026 reorganization from legacy Space & Airborne Systems and Integrated Mission Systems businesses.

Oligopoly

Government Contracting Relationships

Legal

Strength

Strength 4 of 5

Durability

Durability 3 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 5 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 2 of 5

L3Harris remains heavily tied to U.S. government-funded work, with Q1 2026 growth driven by classified and international missionized-aircraft programs.

Government Contracting Relationships moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • U.S. budget delays or priority shifts slow program starts
  • Recompete losses on classified or ISR programs
  • Customer concentration raises protest, termination and oversight risk

Leading indicators

  • Book-to-bill and backlog in Space & Mission Systems
  • Major classified and international ISR awards
  • U.S. defense and intelligence budget appropriations

Counterarguments

  • Large peers have comparable government relationships
  • Government customers can re-compete major integration work

Design In Qualification

Demand

Strength

Strength 4 of 5

Durability

Durability 3 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 1 of 5

Mission systems, space payloads and platform integration work are designed into specific missions; switching usually requires qualification, testing and operational acceptance.

Design In Qualification moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Open mission systems architectures reduce incumbent lock-in
  • Technology refresh cycles let customers re-compete payloads and sensors
  • Performance issues create customer willingness to switch

Leading indicators

  • Follow-on lots and sustainment awards
  • Classified program ramp and margin performance
  • Platform integration milestones

Counterarguments

  • Platform owners can force open interfaces
  • Technical differentiation can narrow as peers catch up

Compliance Advantage

Legal

Strength

Strength 3 of 5

Durability

Durability 2 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 2 of 5

Classified defense work requires cleared technical talent and mature cybersecurity practices, creating fixed-cost hurdles for smaller competitors.

Compliance Advantage moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Cyber incident or compliance failure restricts contracting eligibility
  • Large peers maintain similar cleared and cyber infrastructure
  • Policy changes reduce compliance requirements or broaden equivalency paths

Leading indicators

  • Security-clearance staffing capacity
  • Cybersecurity audit and assessment outcomes
  • Classified program hiring and retention

Counterarguments

  • Compliance is a threshold requirement, not a guaranteed differentiator
  • Prime contractors and top-tier peers can match these capabilities

Communication & Spectrum Dominance

Secure tactical communications, resilient waveforms, broadband networks, night vision, datalinks and electronic warfare

Revenue and operating-profit shares use Q1 2026 gross segment revenue and segment operating income before intersegment elimination and corporate/unallocated items. This segment carries forward legacy Communication Systems plus spectrum-dominance capabilities after the 2026 reorganization.

Oligopoly

Design In Qualification

Demand

Strength

Strength 4 of 5

Durability

Durability 3 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 2 of 5

Secure radios, waveforms, night-vision devices and EW payloads become embedded in customer interoperability, training and sustainment workflows.

Design In Qualification moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Open standards lower waveform and network lock-in
  • Rapid software-defined radio and EW technology shifts
  • Customers mandate multi-vendor interoperability

Leading indicators

  • Tactical radio and resilient-communications awards
  • Night vision device volume and margin
  • EW program ramps and sustainment renewals

Counterarguments

  • DoD can re-compete radio and EW programs
  • Interoperability standards can enable alternative suppliers

Procurement Inertia

Demand

Strength

Strength 3 of 5

Durability

Durability 2 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 1 of 5

Large fielded communications and vision deployments create training, logistics and doctrine inertia, supporting repeat orders and upgrades.

Procurement Inertia moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Procurement consolidation shifts volume to competitors
  • Budget pressure lowers replacement cadence
  • New technology offers enough advantage to overcome installed-base inertia

Leading indicators

  • International resilient communications orders
  • Replacement and upgrade cycle timing
  • Segment operating margin and product mix

Counterarguments

  • Training inertia weakens when systems are modular
  • Government buyers can prioritize price once requirements are met

Compliance Advantage

Legal

Strength

Strength 3 of 5

Durability

Durability 2 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 1 of 5

Secure communications programs require defense cybersecurity controls, supply-chain flow-downs and incident reporting discipline.

Compliance Advantage moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Compliance becomes table stakes among large defense suppliers
  • Supplier cyber weaknesses create program disruption
  • Security incident damages trust in secure communications offerings

Leading indicators

  • Cybersecurity assessment outcomes
  • Supply-chain flow-down compliance
  • Incidents, remediations and audit findings

Counterarguments

  • Large peers can satisfy the same compliance requirements
  • Compliance burden alone does not create customer preference

Missile Solutions

Solid rocket motors, missile propulsion, armament, fuzing, space propulsion and advanced munitions capacity

Revenue and operating-profit shares use Q1 2026 gross segment revenue and segment operating income before intersegment elimination and corporate/unallocated items. This segment combines Aerojet Rocketdyne propulsion and missile businesses under the fiscal 2026 Missile Solutions structure.

Duopoly

Capacity Moat

Supply

Strength

Strength 4 of 5

Durability

Durability 3 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 2 of 5

Large solid rocket motor capacity is scarce, capital intensive and increasingly supported by direct government industrial-base investment.

Capacity Moat moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Government subsidies bring new capacity and competitors online
  • Capacity additions overshoot funded missile demand
  • Energetics, labor or safety constraints slow facility ramps

Leading indicators

  • Solid rocket motor capacity and facility ramp milestones
  • Missile Solutions backlog and book-to-bill
  • DoW investment, procurement and IPO transaction milestones

Counterarguments

  • Capacity scarcity can shrink if the government funds multiple suppliers
  • Capacity does not ensure margins if contracts are cost-plus or price-capped

Keystone Component

Supply

Strength

Strength 4 of 5

Durability

Durability 3 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 2 of 5

Solid rocket motors and propulsion systems are chokepoint inputs for missile defense, hypersonics and tactical missile programs.

Keystone Component moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Prime contractors design around existing propulsion suppliers
  • Alternative propulsion or sourcing options mature
  • Program cancellations reduce component pull-through

Leading indicators

  • Content wins on PAC-3, THAAD, Tomahawk, Standard Missile and hypersonics
  • Funded backlog in propulsion and munitions
  • Production rate improvements by motor class

Counterarguments

  • Primes and government customers can pressure suppliers on price and capacity commitments
  • Chokepoint status attracts political scrutiny and dual-source mandates

Government Contracting Relationships

Legal

Strength

Strength 4 of 5

Durability

Durability 3 of 3

Confidence

Confidence 4 of 5

Evidence

Evidence 1 of 5

Missile Solutions is increasingly tied to strategic government industrial-base initiatives and long-duration missile production programs.

Government Contracting Relationships moat: definition, examples, and stocks

Erosion risks

  • Appropriations or authorization delays affect the proposed DoW investment
  • Industrial-base policy favors additional competitors
  • Safety or quality failures disrupt government confidence

Leading indicators

  • DoW direct-investment closing and IPO progress
  • Multi-year procurement framework agreements
  • Missile program production rates and award cadence

Counterarguments

  • Government backing may come with tighter oversight and lower economic upside
  • Strategic importance can reduce supplier freedom on capital allocation

Evidence

sec_filing

was 75%

Revenue from contracts funded through the U.S. Government was 75% of fiscal 2025 revenue.

news

classified and international missionized aircraft programs

Q1 2026 Space & Mission Systems revenue growth was led by classified and international missionized-aircraft activity.

sec_filing

design, development, integration, production and sustainment

The annual report describes legacy SAS/IMS activities that now feed the new Space & Mission Systems segment.

sec_filing

approximately 18,000 engineers and scientists

Large technical workforce supports program execution and classified-defense eligibility.

sec_filing

ISO 27001 certified

L3Harris describes a mature information-security management program relevant to defense contracting compliance.

Showing 5 of 14 sources.

Risks & Indicators

Erosion risks

  • U.S. budget delays or priority shifts slow program starts
  • Recompete losses on classified or ISR programs
  • Customer concentration raises protest, termination and oversight risk
  • Open mission systems architectures reduce incumbent lock-in
  • Technology refresh cycles let customers re-compete payloads and sensors
  • Performance issues create customer willingness to switch

Leading indicators

  • Book-to-bill and backlog in Space & Mission Systems
  • Major classified and international ISR awards
  • U.S. defense and intelligence budget appropriations
  • Follow-on lots and sustainment awards
  • Classified program ramp and margin performance
  • Platform integration milestones

Keep the research going

Created 2026-01-04
Updated 2026-07-01

More Rankings & Systems

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.