VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★

PRICE: 0 CENTS

Thursday, January 1, 2026

Airbus SE

AIR · Euronext Paris

Market cap (USD)
SectorIndustrials
CountryNL
Data as of
Moat score
91/ 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Spot something outdated?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

Airbus SE is a European aerospace group with three reported segments: Commercial Aircraft, Helicopters, and Defence & Space. The core moat is supply-side scale and know-how in large commercial jets (a global duopoly) reinforced by deep backlog and airline switching frictions from fleet commonality and training. Helicopters adds durable aftermarket/service-network advantages and a leading share in the civil and parapublic market. Defence & Space benefits from long-running government programs and backlog visibility, but profitability can be volatile due to program execution and fixed-price risk.

Primary segment

Commercial Aircraft

Market structure

Duopoly

Market share

68.8% (implied)

HHI: 5,704

Coverage

3 segments · 8 tags

Updated 2026-01-01

Segments

Commercial Aircraft

Large commercial jet aircraft manufacturing (narrowbody and widebody)

Revenue

71.7%

Structure

Duopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

68.8% (implied)

Peers

BAERJ

Helicopters

Civil and parapublic helicopters (OEM + support/services)

Revenue

11.2%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

57% (reported)

Peers

LDO.MITXTLMT

Defence and Space

Defense aerospace and space systems (military aircraft, ISR/communications, satellites)

Revenue

17.1%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

weak

Share

Peers

BAESYHO.PALMTRTX+1

Moat Claims

Commercial Aircraft

Large commercial jet aircraft manufacturing (narrowbody and widebody)

Revenue share derived from FY2024 segment revenues excluding eliminations: Airbus (commercial aircraft activities) EUR 50,646m of EUR 70,669m (Airbus+Helicopters+Defence & Space).

Duopoly

Capex Knowhow Scale

Supply

Strength

Durability

Confidence

Evidence

Large fixed-cost industrial base and program know-how enable sustained high-rate production; difficult for new entrants to replicate at scale.

Erosion risks

  • State-backed entrants scaling capacity
  • Sustained supply-chain constraints delaying ramp-up
  • Technological disruption changing aircraft architectures

Leading indicators

  • Monthly production rates vs targets (A320/A220/A350)
  • Recurring cost and industrial efficiency metrics
  • Supplier constraint disclosures and lead times

Counterarguments

  • Capital access for state-backed challengers can narrow scale gaps over time
  • Incumbent scale does not prevent execution issues or delays

Training Org Change Costs

Demand

Strength

Durability

Confidence

Evidence

Fleet commonality and crew training create switching frictions for airlines (pilot type ratings, procedures, spares, and maintenance tooling).

Erosion risks

  • Airline fleet diversification strategies
  • Simulator/training capacity expansion reducing frictions
  • Regulatory or operational changes reducing commonality benefits

Leading indicators

  • Airline fleet-mix shifts in A320-family vs 737-family
  • New customer wins/losses in key carriers
  • Used aircraft pricing differentials by type

Counterarguments

  • Large airlines can and do operate mixed fleets when economics justify it
  • Switching costs slow change but rarely prevent it over multi-year cycles

Long Term Contracts

Demand

Strength

Durability

Confidence

Evidence

Large multi-year backlog creates slot scarcity and revenue visibility; it also makes rapid share shifts hard because production capacity is constrained.

Erosion risks

  • Airline bankruptcies and order cancellations in downturns
  • Delivery delays that shift or reduce conversions of backlog into revenue
  • Geopolitical sanctions/export restrictions affecting deliveries

Leading indicators

  • Net orders and cancellations
  • Backlog size and delivery lead times
  • Customer payment/financing conditions

Counterarguments

  • Backlog is not revenue; profitability depends on execution and pricing
  • A strong competitor recovery can redirect future orders even with existing backlog

Helicopters

Civil and parapublic helicopters (OEM + support/services)

Revenue share derived from FY2024 segment revenues excluding eliminations: Airbus Helicopters EUR 7,941m of EUR 70,669m (Airbus+Helicopters+Defence & Space).

Oligopoly

Service Field Network

Supply

Strength

Durability

Confidence

Evidence

A large global support and MRO/training footprint reduces downtime and total cost of ownership, supporting repeat buys and long-lived installed-base economics.

Erosion risks

  • Independent MRO growth and parts alternatives
  • Competitors expanding support footprints
  • Supply constraints limiting spare parts availability

Leading indicators

  • Services revenue growth and margin
  • Aircraft availability / dispatch reliability metrics at major operators
  • Turnaround time for parts and maintenance events

Counterarguments

  • Large fleet operators can multi-source maintenance and reduce dependence on OEM networks
  • Support network breadth does not guarantee lowest lifecycle cost vs competitors

Training Org Change Costs

Demand

Strength

Durability

Confidence

Evidence

Pilot/maintenance training and operational procedures create frictions to switching helicopter OEMs, especially for operators standardised on a platform family.

Erosion risks

  • Simulator availability and third-party training reduce frictions
  • Fleet operators standardising on multi-OEM procurement
  • Common avionics/standards narrowing operational differences

Leading indicators

  • Repeat-buy rates by major operators
  • Pilot transition timelines and training capacity constraints
  • Used helicopter price differentials by model

Counterarguments

  • Operators can switch over time as fleets age and budgets change
  • Procurements (especially public tenders) can override switching frictions

Long Term Contracts

Demand

Strength

Durability

Confidence

Evidence

Order book and service/support arrangements provide multi-year workload visibility in a market with long product lifecycles.

Erosion risks

  • Order deferrals/cancellations from budget cuts
  • Program delays and certification issues
  • Competitive tender wins shifting backlog composition

Leading indicators

  • Net orders and cancellations
  • Book-to-bill (units/value)
  • Service contract attach rate on new deliveries

Counterarguments

  • Backlog can be volatile in government-heavy end markets
  • Visibility does not ensure profitability if costs inflate on fixed-price elements

Defence and Space

Defense aerospace and space systems (military aircraft, ISR/communications, satellites)

Revenue share derived from FY2024 segment revenues excluding eliminations: Airbus Defence and Space EUR 12,082m of EUR 70,669m (Airbus+Helicopters+Defence & Space).

Oligopoly

Government Contracting Relationships

Legal

Strength

Durability

Confidence

Evidence

Defense procurement is relationship- and program-based, with long-running platforms and sovereign/strategic considerations that favor incumbents once selected.

Erosion risks

  • Shifts in defense budgets and procurement priorities
  • Geopolitical constraints on exports
  • Program performance issues impacting re-competes

Leading indicators

  • Net order intake and book-to-bill for Defence and Space
  • Major program award/renewal announcements
  • Contract performance and margin trend

Counterarguments

  • Government customers can re-compete programs and split awards for political reasons
  • Execution problems can override incumbency advantages

Long Term Contracts

Demand

Strength

Durability

Confidence

Evidence

A large segment order book provides multi-year revenue visibility, typical of defense and institutional space programs.

Erosion risks

  • Fixed-price contract losses from cost overruns
  • Cancellations/deferrals due to political changes
  • Technology shifts (e.g., new space architectures) reducing legacy demand

Leading indicators

  • Order book level and conversion to revenue
  • Program-level charges and provisions
  • Competitive wins/losses in new defense/space tenders

Counterarguments

  • Backlog does not guarantee margins; program risk can turn backlog into losses
  • Disruptive entrants (e.g., new space launch economics) can compress future demand/pricing

Evidence

other
Airbus reports Full-Year (FY) 2024 results

The A320 Family programme continues to ramp up towards a rate of 75 aircraft per month in 2027.

High-rate production targets imply a large, capital-intensive industrial system and deep manufacturing know-how.

other
Airbus A320 Family product page

Pilots can fly the A318, A319, A320 and A321 with a Single Type Rating thanks to their identical cockpits and operating procedures.

Airbus explicitly describes single type rating/commonality, which reduces training burden within the family and reinforces fleet-standardisation dynamics.

other
Airbus reports Full-Year (FY) 2024 results

The order backlog amounted to 8,658 commercial aircraft at the end of December 2024.

Order backlog is a concrete indicator of locked-in demand and long production slots.

other
Airbus reports 766 commercial aircraft deliveries in 2024

Airbus delivered 766 commercial aircraft in 2024.

Airbus delivery count used for implied share calculation.

other
Boeing Reports Fourth Quarter Results (Full Year 2024)

Delivered 348 commercial airplanes and recorded 279 net orders

Boeing full-year delivery count used for implied share calculation.

Showing 5 of 13 sources.

Risks & Indicators

Erosion risks

  • State-backed entrants scaling capacity
  • Sustained supply-chain constraints delaying ramp-up
  • Technological disruption changing aircraft architectures
  • Airline fleet diversification strategies
  • Simulator/training capacity expansion reducing frictions
  • Regulatory or operational changes reducing commonality benefits

Leading indicators

  • Monthly production rates vs targets (A320/A220/A350)
  • Recurring cost and industrial efficiency metrics
  • Supplier constraint disclosures and lead times
  • Airline fleet-mix shifts in A320-family vs 737-family
  • New customer wins/losses in key carriers
  • Used aircraft pricing differentials by type
Created 2026-01-01
Updated 2026-01-01

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.