LDOS vs PSN

Key Takeaways

• Leidos Holdings (LDOS) commands a market capitalization of approximately $14.1 billion, roughly 2.3 times larger than Parsons Corporation, and generated full-year 2025 revenue of $17.2 billion with double-digit earnings growth.
• Parsons Corporation (PSN), with a market cap near $6.3 billion, delivered a record adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) margin of 9.6% in 2025, though top-line revenue remained under pressure from a confidential contract wind-down.
• Both companies operate in the defense and government services sector, but Leidos leans more heavily into IT modernization, health services, and cyber, while Parsons balances federal solutions with a growing critical infrastructure segment.
• Leidos offers a dividend yield of roughly 1.5% and trades at a trailing P/E (price-to-earnings) ratio near 10, whereas Parsons pays no dividend and carries a trailing P/E above 28, reflecting divergent investor expectations and capital allocation philosophies.
• Recent analyst sentiment has been mixed for both names, with Leidos navigating post-shutdown recovery and the integration of the Entrust acquisition, while Parsons contends with the loss of a key FAA contract and recalibrated growth expectations.
• From a valuation standpoint, Leidos appears more defensive with a lower beta and a shareholder return program, while Parsons presents a higher-growth narrative in infrastructure markets once the confidential contract headwind subsides.

Introduction

Investors navigating the government technology and defense services landscape often weigh the merits of established prime contractors against agile mid-cap rivals. LDOS (Leidos Holdings) and PSN (Parsons Corporation) exemplify this dynamic. Leidos, a Reston, Virginia-based industry giant with roughly 47,000 employees, brings scale, a $49 billion backlog, and a diversified portfolio spanning national security, health, and digital modernization. Parsons, also headquartered in Northern Virginia, has carved out a distinct identity across critical infrastructure and federal solutions, with engineering expertise recognized globally. This comparison examines how these two defense-oriented companies stack up across financial performance, strategic positioning, and market sentiment in the current environment, providing a balanced lens for those evaluating relative positioning in this sector.

LDOS Overview and Recent Performance

Leidos Holdings is one of the largest pure-play government technology and mission-support contractors in the United States. The company operates through segments that include National Security & Digital, Health & Civil, Commercial & International, and Defense Systems. In recent months, Leidos has navigated a complex operating environment shaped by a six-week federal government shutdown and evolving administration spending priorities. Despite these disruptions, the company closed its 2025 fiscal year with record annual revenue of $17.2 billion and non-GAAP (non-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) diluted earnings per share of $11.99, representing a 17% year-over-year increase. Net income margins expanded to 8.5%, supported by improved program execution and cost discipline.

Leidos has also been active on the strategic front. The company recently announced the acquisition of Entrust Solutions Group, a power and utilities engineering firm, for $2.4 billion—broadening its footprint in the energy infrastructure vertical under its NorthStar 2030 strategy. Earlier, the acquisition of Kudu Dynamics strengthened its cyber capabilities. The company's backlog reached $49 billion in early 2026, and management issued forward guidance for revenue between $17.5 billion and $17.9 billion, with adjusted EBITDA margins in the mid-13% range. The stock has experienced a notable pullback from its 52-week highs above $200, trading more recently near the $112 range, which has compressed its trailing P/E below 11 and drawn attention from value-oriented investors.

PSN Overview and Recent Performance

Parsons Corporation operates across two primary segments: Critical Infrastructure and Federal Solutions. The Critical Infrastructure segment—encompassing transportation, urban development, and environmental remediation—has been a standout growth engine, posting double-digit revenue gains and margin expansion throughout 2025. The Federal Solutions segment, meanwhile, has faced headwinds from the wind-down of a large confidential contract, which masked underlying organic growth of approximately 8% to 9% in the company's core federal portfolio during the fiscal year.

For the full year 2025, Parsons reported revenue of $6.4 billion, down 6% from the prior year on a reported basis but up 12% when excluding the confidential contract. The company posted record adjusted EBITDA of $609 million and a record full-year adjusted EBITDA margin of 9.6%, underscoring improved program performance and effective cost management. Net income rose 3% to $241 million. The company matched its prior-year record by securing 15 contracts each valued at $100 million or more. However, the stock has been under pressure following a high-profile FAA contract loss to a competitor, and several analysts have trimmed price targets in response to slower near-term growth projections. Trading near $59 with a trailing P/E above 28, Parsons carries a premium valuation relative to the broader defense services group, reflecting investor confidence in its infrastructure growth trajectory. PSN does not pay a dividend, opting instead to direct capital toward acquisitions and share repurchases.

Trending AI Robots

For traders seeking a data-driven edge in comparing stocks like LDOS and PSN, Tickeron's platform offers access to hundreds of AI-powered trading bots designed to navigate a broad spectrum of market conditions. These bots trade thousands of different tickers and employ diverse trading styles, strategies, and timeframes—ranging from short-term momentum plays to longer-duration trend-following approaches. Only a select subset of these bots, however, earns a place in the curated Trending AI Robots section, where performance, consistency, and adaptability to prevailing market dynamics set them apart. Bots featured in this section have demonstrated noteworthy statistical profiles, with some reporting annualized returns in the double digits and win rates exceeding 70%, depending on strategy and market environment. Exploring the Trending AI Robots page can offer valuable perspective on how artificial intelligence evaluates relative strength, trend quality, and volatility across stocks like these.

Head-to-Head Comparison

When placed side by side, Leidos and Parsons reveal meaningful contrasts across several dimensions. Scale and Diversification: Leidos generates nearly three times the annual revenue of Parsons and maintains a backlog more than five times larger. This scale advantage provides broader insulation from single-contract disruptions, though Parsons' smaller base also means individual contract wins can have an outsized positive impact on growth. Business Model Mix: Leidos is overwhelmingly concentrated in U.S. federal government markets, with health services, intelligence community support, and defense IT forming its core. Parsons, by contrast, derives meaningful revenue from non-federal critical infrastructure work—including transportation engineering in North America and the Middle East—which provides a degree of diversification away from federal budget cycles.

Growth Profile: Excluding the confidential contract drag, Parsons' organic revenue growth has been running at high single digits in its core business, outpacing Leidos' low-to-mid single-digit organic trajectory. However, the confidential contract overhang and the FAA contract loss introduce uncertainty around Parsons' near-term reported growth. Leidos, meanwhile, faces its own near-term integration risks tied to the Entrust acquisition but benefits from steadier demand visibility across its national security portfolio. Profitability and Capital Allocation: Leidos delivers a net income margin above 8% and generates substantial free cash flow, which it deploys through dividends, share repurchases, and acquisitions. Parsons boasts a higher adjusted EBITDA margin trajectory—crossing 9.6%—but its higher P/E multiple suggests the market is pricing in future growth that has yet to fully materialize in reported earnings. Risk Factors: Both companies face exposure to shifts in federal procurement policy and budget priorities. Leidos carries higher absolute debt at $4.6 billion against $1.1 billion in cash, while Parsons maintains a net leverage profile supportive of further M&A (mergers and acquisitions). Sector-wide, government contractor stocks remain sensitive to continuing resolution dynamics, shutdown risks, and administration-driven spending realignments.

Tickeron AI Verdict

Based on observable factors including trend consistency, valuation stability, and catalyst visibility, Tickeron's AI-driven analysis would likely tilt in favor of LDOS under current market conditions. Leidos presents a more defensive profile with a significantly compressed valuation multiple, a well-funded dividend program, consistent earnings growth, and a massive backlog that provides multi-year revenue visibility. The company's diversified mission set and the strategic logic behind its NorthStar 2030 portfolio reshaping add incremental confidence in trend durability. Parsons, while offering compelling growth potential in critical infrastructure and a record of margin improvement, carries a higher relative valuation and faces more pronounced near-term execution questions tied to contract transitions and growth re-acceleration. The AI framework tends to reward the stability of Leidos' earnings profile and the margin of safety implied by its current valuation, though it would likely continue to monitor PSN for a catalyst-driven inflection that could alter relative positioning.

Disclaimer

The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.

Disclaimers and Limitations