MetaCap

Curtiss-Wright (CW) vs FTAI Aviation (FTAI)

Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 10, 2026.

Summary

FTAI Aviation (FTAI) has outperformed Curtiss-Wright (CW) over the past year, gaining 0.3% versus a loss of 7.6%. Over five years, FTAI leads with a +675.0% price change compared with +289.9% for CW. Curtiss-Wright is the larger company by market cap ($18.93 billion vs $17.46 billion), about 1.1 times the size, while FTAI Aviation is growing revenue faster (+44.5% vs +12.1%).

On valuation, FTAI Aviation trades at a lower forward P/E (12.6x vs 29.9x for Curtiss-Wright). FTAI Aviation offers the higher dividend yield (1.00% vs 0.19%). FTAI Aviation converts more of its revenue into profit, with a net margin of 20.0% versus 13.8%.

Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology

Relative performance

CW-7.61%FTAI+0.35%
+88%+37%-14%
Oct 9, 20251 yearOct 9, 2026
CW+284.86%FTAI+686.67%
+1383%+641%-100%
Oct 4, 20215 yearsOct 5, 2026

Percent change in share price from the first common trading day shown; excludes dividends.

Head-to-head

CW versus FTAI key metrics
MetricCWFTAI
Share price$512.60$169.97
Market cap$18.93B$17.46B
1-day change+1.05%-0.64%
YTD return-7.01%-13.66%
1-year return-7.61%+0.35%
5-year return+289.93%+675.03%
P/E ratio (TTM)35.3036.95
Forward P/E29.8812.59
EPS (TTM)$14.52$4.60
Dividend yield0.19%1.00%
Annual dividend$0.98$1.70
Revenue (latest FY)$3.50B$2.51B
Revenue growth (YoY)+12.08%+44.53%
Net income (latest FY)$484.23M$501.06M
Gross margin37.20%46.17%
Operating margin18.11%—
Net margin13.84%19.98%
52-week high$808.16$323.51
52-week low$501.60$149.50
Distance from 52-week high-36.57%-47.46%
Analyst consensusbuystrong_buy
Avg. price target upside+48.48%+109.22%
Average volume364.57K1.47M
Shares outstanding36.93M102.71M
Employees9,200985
SectorTechnologyIndustrials
IndustryIndustrial Machinery/ComponentsMisc Corporate Leasing Services

Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.

Key differences

  • FTAI Aviation is more profitable, keeping 20.0 cents of every revenue dollar as net income versus 13.8 cents for Curtiss-Wright.
  • FTAI Aviation grew revenue faster in its latest fiscal year (+44.53% vs +12.08%).
  • The two companies sit in different sectors: Curtiss-Wright in Technology and FTAI Aviation in Industrials.

About Curtiss-Wright

CW stock →

Curtiss-Wright Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, provides engineered products, solutions, and services mainly to aerospace and defense, commercial nuclear power, process, and industrial markets worldwide. It operates through three segments: Aerospace & Industrial, Defense Electronics, and Naval & Power.

Technology · Industrial Machinery/Components · 9,200 employees

About FTAI Aviation

FTAI stock →

FTAI Aviation Ltd. owns, acquires, and sells aviation equipment for the transportation of goods and people worldwide.

Industrials · Misc Corporate Leasing Services · 985 employees

CW vs FTAI FAQ

Which is bigger, Curtiss-Wright or FTAI Aviation?

Curtiss-Wright (CW) is larger, with a market capitalization of $18.93B compared with $17.46B for FTAI Aviation (FTAI).

Which stock has performed better over the past year, CW or FTAI?

FTAI returned +0.35% over the past 12 months, compared with -7.61% for CW (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.

Which has the lower P/E ratio, CW or FTAI?

CW has the lower trailing P/E at 35.3, versus 36.9 for FTAI. A lower P/E is not by itself a sign of a better investment; it can reflect slower expected growth or higher risk.

Which pays a higher dividend, Curtiss-Wright or FTAI Aviation?

FTAI Aviation has the higher yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.19% for Curtiss-Wright.

Are Curtiss-Wright and FTAI Aviation in the same industry?

No. Curtiss-Wright is in the Technology sector, while FTAI Aviation is in Industrials.

More comparisons