VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★

PRICE: 0 CENTS

Sunday, December 28, 2025

Thales S.A.

HO · Euronext Paris

Market cap (USD)$55.3B
SectorIndustrials
CountryFR
Data as of
Moat score
73/ 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Spot something outdated?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

Thales is a French aerospace, defence and cybersecurity group organized into three reported operating segments: Defence (~53% of FY2024 sales), Aerospace (~27%), and Cyber & Digital (~20%). In Defence and Aerospace, moats are driven by sovereign/government customer relationships, long multi-year programs and backlog, and certification plus design-in on platforms. Cyber & Digital has strong trust/brand and a broad portfolio across identity and security, but faces a more competitive market with many capable rivals. Key risks include program re-competition, export/regulatory constraints, and technology shifts that reduce differentiation.

Primary segment

Defence

Market structure

Oligopoly

Market share

HHI:

Coverage

3 segments · 5 tags

Updated 2025-12-28

Segments

Defence

Defense electronics, secure communications, and mission systems

Revenue

53.3%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

RTXLHXESLTAIR.PA+3

Aerospace

Avionics, in-flight experience/connectivity, and space systems

Revenue

26.6%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

RTXHONGEGRMN+2

Cyber & Digital

Cybersecurity and digital identity solutions (IAM, data/app security, biometrics, SIM/eSIM, payments)

Revenue

19.6%

Structure

Competitive

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

AVGOIBMFFIVOKTA+2

Moat Claims

Defence

Defense electronics, secure communications, and mission systems

Revenue/Adjusted EBIT share computed (relative to sum of three operating segments' Adjusted EBIT) from FY2024 segment key figures in Thales 2024 Universal Registration Document (Defence sales EUR 10,969m; Adjusted EBIT EUR 1,432m; order book EUR 39,154m).

Oligopoly

Government Contracting Relationships

Legal

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

Defence procurement favors trusted suppliers with security credentials, program track record, and sovereign relationships; Thales is embedded with multiple allied armed forces.

Erosion risks

  • Defence budget reallocation or program cancellations
  • Political/export restrictions affecting addressable markets
  • Competitors winning next-generation programs

Leading indicators

  • Defence order intake and backlog growth
  • Win rates on major tenders (France/NATO/export)
  • Share of multi-year framework/service contracts

Counterarguments

  • Governments can re-compete programs and force price reductions; geopolitical shifts can abruptly change procurement priorities.

Long Term Contracts

Demand

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

Large order book and multi-year programs provide visibility and reduce near-term competitive churn.

Erosion risks

  • Execution issues leading to penalties or renegotiations
  • Inflation/cost overruns on fixed-price contracts
  • Customer push for accelerated re-competition

Leading indicators

  • Backlog-to-sales ratio
  • Program delivery milestones and margin stability
  • Order intake mix (new platforms vs extensions)

Counterarguments

  • Backlog can mask future competitiveness; new awards can slow if performance or cost control deteriorates.

Design In Qualification

Demand

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

Mission systems are integrated across equipment, logistics support, and systems, creating operational switching costs once deployed across fleets and networks.

Erosion risks

  • Standardization/interoperability reducing vendor lock-in
  • Modular open architectures enabling component swaps

Leading indicators

  • Share of revenues from support/services vs initial equipment
  • Adoption of open standards in defence networks

Counterarguments

  • Some programs mandate open architectures and multi-vendor interoperability, limiting lock-in.

Aerospace

Avionics, in-flight experience/connectivity, and space systems

Revenue/Adjusted EBIT share computed (relative to sum of three operating segments' Adjusted EBIT) from FY2024 segment key figures in Thales 2024 Universal Registration Document (Aerospace sales EUR 5,471m; Adjusted EBIT EUR 391m).

Oligopoly

Design In Qualification

Demand

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

Avionics and mission systems are selected early in aircraft programs; certification/integration and long platform lifecycles create multi-year switching costs and aftermarket pull-through.

Erosion risks

  • OEM insourcing or platform standardization
  • Loss of next-generation aircraft bids
  • Software-defined architectures reducing hardware differentiation

Leading indicators

  • Major platform wins/losses (Airbus, Boeing, Embraer, Dassault)
  • Aerospace segment order intake and backlog coverage
  • Aftermarket/service revenue mix

Counterarguments

  • Airframers can dual-source and pressure pricing; technology shifts may lower switching costs over time.

Regulated Standards Pipe

Legal

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

Aerospace systems face stringent airworthiness and safety standards; certifications and compliance capabilities raise barriers to entry and extend product lifecycles.

Erosion risks

  • Regulatory harmonization making certification cheaper
  • Open standards reducing proprietary interfaces

Leading indicators

  • Certification milestones on new products
  • Regulatory changes affecting avionics standards

Counterarguments

  • Large competitors also possess certification capability; regulation alone may not guarantee share or margins.

Service Field Network

Supply

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

Fleet support/service commitments embed Thales into customers' operations and can improve retention vs point-solution suppliers.

Erosion risks

  • Airlines/OEMs consolidating MRO suppliers
  • Service pricing pressure during downturns

Leading indicators

  • Service contract renewals and attach rates
  • Customer satisfaction / fleet uptime metrics

Counterarguments

  • Service work can be bid competitively, and customers may unbundle service from equipment over time.

Cyber & Digital

Cybersecurity and digital identity solutions (IAM, data/app security, biometrics, SIM/eSIM, payments)

Revenue/Adjusted EBIT share computed (relative to sum of three operating segments' Adjusted EBIT) from FY2024 segment key figures in Thales 2024 Universal Registration Document (Cyber & Digital sales EUR 4,024m; Adjusted EBIT EUR 585m).

Competitive

Brand Trust

Demand

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

Security, identity, and encryption buying decisions heavily weight trust and track record; Thales positions itself as a trusted provider to governments and large enterprises.

Erosion risks

  • High-profile security incident harming reputation
  • Rapid tech shifts (cloud-native, AI security) favoring newer specialists
  • Hyperscalers expanding into identity/security

Leading indicators

  • Net retention / renewal rates in cyber and identity products
  • Security incident disclosures and third-party ratings
  • Share of revenue from cloud-delivered offerings

Counterarguments

  • Trust is necessary but not sufficient; buyers may prefer best-of-breed point solutions from faster-moving specialists.

Suite Bundling

Demand

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

A broad portfolio across identity, data security, and application security can reduce vendor sprawl and improve cross-sell, supporting account control in large customers.

Erosion risks

  • Customers unbundling suites for best-of-breed
  • Product integration gaps after acquisitions

Leading indicators

  • Cross-sell attach rates (e.g., Imperva + CipherTrust)
  • Platform consolidation wins vs point-solution churn

Counterarguments

  • Security buyers often prefer specialized vendors; integration complexity can reduce suite value.

Capex Knowhow Scale

Supply

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

Security and identity require sustained R&D and deep cryptographic expertise; Thales highlights decades of experience, R&D investment, and a large patent base.

Erosion risks

  • Open-source and standardized cryptography reducing differentiation
  • Talent competition increasing R&D cost

Leading indicators

  • R&D intensity and patenting trend
  • Ability to ship post-quantum crypto upgrades

Counterarguments

  • Patents and R&D do not guarantee differentiation; many competitors have strong R&D and faster product cycles.

Evidence

sec_filing
Thales 2024 Universal Registration Document

The armed forces of more than 50 countries around the world are equipped with Thales solutions.

Shows breadth of government/armed forces relationships, which are difficult to replicate quickly.

sec_filing
Thales 2024 Universal Registration Document

...prime contractor for the French Armed Forces' CONTACT program;

Illustrates high-trust national programs and incumbent positioning in sovereign defence communications.

sec_filing
Thales 2024 Universal Registration Document

Order book at December 31 39,154

Key figure for the Defence segment indicating substantial contracted backlog.

sec_filing
Thales 2024 Universal Registration Document

Approximately 2/3 of this amount is expected to convert into revenue within the next 3 years.

Backlog conversion expectation supports multi-year revenue visibility.

sec_filing
Thales 2024 Universal Registration Document

...from equipment through logistics support and related services to systems.

Suggests lifecycle integration (equipment + support + systems) that raises switching costs.

Showing 5 of 12 sources.

Risks & Indicators

Erosion risks

  • Defence budget reallocation or program cancellations
  • Political/export restrictions affecting addressable markets
  • Competitors winning next-generation programs
  • Execution issues leading to penalties or renegotiations
  • Inflation/cost overruns on fixed-price contracts
  • Customer push for accelerated re-competition

Leading indicators

  • Defence order intake and backlog growth
  • Win rates on major tenders (France/NATO/export)
  • Share of multi-year framework/service contracts
  • Backlog-to-sales ratio
  • Program delivery milestones and margin stability
  • Order intake mix (new platforms vs extensions)
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.