Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_2138955391-scaled-e1677211261225

Ukraine War is great for the portfolio, as defense stocks enjoy a banner year

The top five US weapons firms outperformed major Wall Street indexes in the last year, mostly on the backs of American taxpayers.

Reporting | Europe
google cta
google cta

This is part of our weeklong series marking the one-year anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, February 24, 2022. See all of the stories here.

In January 2022, Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes told investors that global instability presented a profit opportunity for his weapons firm. "[W]e are seeing, I would say, opportunities for international sales," said Hayes, citing, among other global events, "tensions in Eastern Europe." He went on to add, "All of those things are putting pressure on some of the defense spending over there. So I fully expect we’re going to see some benefit from it."

Russia's catastrophic invasion of Ukraine unleashed financial and humanitarian pressures around the world driven by rising energy prices, ballooning inflation, and food supply chain disruptions.

But Hayes was right. Raytheon and fellow weapons manufacturers have profited handsomely, even while most investors suffered losses.

The big five weapons firms have achieved impressive stock growth since Russia’s invasion,  dramatically outperforming the major indexes. Shares in Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics appreciated in value 12.78 percent on average in the one-year span since the day before the Russian February 24 invasion last year until the close of financial markets on Thursday.

That growth is even more impressive when compared against the performance of the major indexes. The top weapons stocks, on average, outperformed the S&P 500 by 17.82 percent, the NASDAQ composite index by 23.88 percent, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average by 12.71 percent.

Two out of the three indexes, the S&P 500 and the NASDAQ Composite, reported losses in that one-year period.

Put another way, a $10,000 investment in the top five weapons firms on the day before the invasion would be worth $11,277 today. A $10,000 investment in the S&P 500 would be worth $9,495.

Much of the U.S. weapons industry’s revenues originate from U.S. government contracts, paid  by taxpayers. For example, Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest weapons manufacturer, may be a for-profit, publicly traded company but the firm’s 2021 annual report acknowledged that, “71% of our $67.0 billion in net sales were from the U.S. Government.”

And the returns of this largely government-funded industry aren’t just reinvested in production facilities and jobs across the country. Much of the returns are simply transferred to shareholders. Lockheed CEO James Taiclet, boasted about how the company delivered $11 billion to shareholders in 2022 via share repurchases and dividend payments, creating “significant value for our shareholders.” In other words, a partially taxpayer-funded payout for shareholders.

Most retail investors, who increasingly favor investing in index funds — a mutual fund or exchange-traded fund that matches the components of a financial market index such as the S&P 500 or the Dow Jones Industrial average — would have largely been left out of Lockheed’s stock buyback bonanza or the increased stock value of weapons firms that have all outperformed the major indexes in the one year since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Indeed, important questions remain about how the war will end, what victory might look like for Ukraine, when and how the rebuilding of Ukraine can begin and the long-term impacts of Putin’s invasion on NATO and the European security architecture. The costs for rebuilding Ukraine’s infrastructure are already estimated at over $1 trillion and rising.

The war’s outcome remains unclear, but one thing is certain: the outbreak of a major war in Europe will spur U.S. and European weapons purchases for years to come.

A ballooning defense budget and U.S. national debt, coupled with high energy costs and global food shortages, will have negative impacts on most Americans. But investors in weapons stocks are reaping gains that few other industries are achieving at a time of global economic turmoil.

“Our products and technologies have been instrumental in helping the people of Ukraine defend itself,” argued Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes in an earnings call last month. Chris Calio — Raytheon’s chief operating officer — noted later in the call that “our backlog is expected to continue to grow, given the heightened and increasingly complex threat environment.”

In other words, a humanitarian, geopolitical, and economic disaster for the world has at least one silver lining: profits for arms manufacturers.


Image: CeltStudio via shutterstock.com
google cta
Reporting | Europe
South Africa: Between Iran and a hard place (Donald Trump)
Top photo credit: President Cyril Ramaphosa (Photo: GCIS/Flickr) and Donald Trump (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

South Africa: Between Iran and a hard place (Donald Trump)

Africa

South Africa is struggling to unfurl its wings as a leading middle power and advance its relations with its fellow BRICS members while keeping out of the cross hairs of the U.S. president. This has been particularly hard considering that one member of the Global South grouping — Iran — is on Donald Trump’s current list of potential military targets.

South Africa joined BRICS in 2006. The organization is supposed to serve as an intergovernmental forum for member countries to connect on issues related to diplomacy, security, and economics. But the bloc has angered President Trump, who sees it as a threat to American leadership, particularly given China’s membership in the group.

keep readingShow less
Trump Khamanei
Top image credit: Bella1105/shutterstock.com

Could Trump bomb Iran before settling on a rationale?

Middle East

Shifting justifications for a war are never a good sign, and they strongly suggest that the war in question was not warranted.

In the Vietnam War, the principal public rationale of saving South Vietnam from communism got replaced in the minds of the warmakers — especially after losing hope of winning the contest in Vietnam — by the belief that the United States had to keep fighting to preserve its credibility. In the Iraq War, when President George W. Bush’s prewar argument about weapons of mass destruction fell apart, he shifted to a rationale centered on bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq.

keep readingShow less
James Holtsnider
Top image credit: James Holtsnider, U.S. President Donald Trump's nominee to be ambassador to Jordan, testifies before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on nominations on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 11, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

New US ambassador's charm offensive is backfiring in Jordan

Middle East

Since arriving in Amman around three months ago to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Jordan, James Holtsnider quickly became one of the highest-profile envoys in the Hashemite Kingdom. In addition to presenting his credentials to King Abdullah II, Holtsnider has met with Jordanian soccer players, attended weddings, and joined tribal gatherings.

However, a January 14 request by a U.S. Embassy delegation for the ambassador to offer condolences at the family home of former Karak mayor Abdullah Al-Dmour showed that many Jordanians have little interest in participating in Holtsnider’s public relations initiative. Dmour’s relatives rejected the U.S. ambassador’s wish to visit. Dmour’s tribe issued a statement noting Holtsnider’s request “violates Jordanian tribal customs, which separates the sanctity of mourning from any political presence with public implications.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.