Lear's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Lear (LEA) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Lear vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 23,794M vs 145,991M combined for its competitors (14.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-2.9% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+3.5%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Lear generated 1.6% revenue growth year over year in Q3 2026, vs 7.5% for its competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 2.4% net margin compares with 12.7% for the peer group.
- Scale: Lear ranks #9 of 56 companies by market capitalization in the Auto & Truck Parts industry, holding 2.6% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Lear accounted for 13.3% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 13.9% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.14M compares with $0.45M for the peer group (0.3x).
- Structure: Lear operates in the following segments: Seating, E-Systems.
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
LEA Sales vs. its Competitors, Q3 2026
Lear reported revenue growth of 1.64 % year on year in Q3 2026, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 7.53 %.
With a net margin of 2.37 %, Lear reported lower profitability than its competitors (12.69 %).
Lear generated 13.26 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 13.92 % a year earlier.
API endpoints for this dataset
Lear vs. its Competitors, Q3 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net income growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in Lear reports; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Lear and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Lear Corp | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (9) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (3) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Lear's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Auto & Truck Parts industry grew revenue 4.1% year over year, combined, vs 1.6% for Lear. Lear's share of combined industry revenue moved from 4.80% to 4.68%, a loss of 0.11 percentage points.
Lear's Competitor Quality Breadth
Group definitions: see Methodology: Performance Group Definitions.
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lear Corp | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| Competitors combined (30) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (9) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 75.00 % (6 of 8) | 87.50 % (7 of 8) | 12.50 % (1 of 8) | 25.00 % (2 of 8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
LEA Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
LEA Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
LEA Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
LEA Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ieh Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Commercial Vehicle Group Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Ducommun Incorporated | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Allison Transmission Holdings Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Cts Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Lear's best-performing competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Lear's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
We estimate the global target market for our electrical business to be approximately $70 billion. Our major competitors in electrical distribution systems include Delphi Automotive PLC, Leoni AG, Molex Incorporated (a subsidiary of Koch Industries Inc.), Sumitomo Corporation, TE Connectivity and Yazaki Corporation. Our major competitors in electronic modules, including connectivity solutions, include Continental AG, Delphi Automotive PLC, Denso Corporation and Robert Bosch GmbH.
Based on independent market studies and management estimates, we believe that
we hold a #2 position globally on the basis of revenue with strong positions
in all major markets. We believe that we are also among the leading suppliers
of various components produced for complete seat systems.
Our primary independent competitor in this segment globally is Johnson Controls,
Inc. Other competitors in this segment include Faurecia S.A., Toyota Boshoku
Corporation, TS Tech Co., Ltd. and Magna International Inc., which have varying
market presence depending on the region, country or automotive manufacturer.
Peugeot S.A., Toyota Motor Corporation and Honda Motor Co. Ltd. hold equity
ownership positions in Faurecia S.A., Toyota Boshoku Corporation and TS Tech
Co., Ltd., respectively. Other automotive manufacturers maintain a presence
in the seat systems market through wholly owned subsidiaries or in-house operations.
In seat components, we compete with the seat systems suppliers identified above,
as well as certain suppliers that specialize in particular components.
Publicly Traded Peers of Lear Corp
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
 Lear Corp |
5,497.88 | 23,793.80 |
 Amphenol Corporation |
192,658.51 | 33,046.10 |
 Eaton Corporation Plc |
133,134.11 | 31,984.00 |
 Emerson Electric Co |
91,094.59 | 18,637.00 |
 Johnson Controls International Plc |
82,908.42 | 24,433.00 |
 Honeywell International Inc |
70,239.96 | 30,716.00 |
| SUBTOTAL | 820,438.80 | 684,728.61 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Lear Corp.
Sources: see Methodology: Peer & Competitor Identification, Sourcing.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Lear Corp versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Lear's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from Lear reports and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Adient Plc | Company report | 85% |
| Huntsman Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Aptiv Plc | Company report | 85% |
| Voxx International Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Sumitomo Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Toyota Boshoku Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Molex Incorporated | Company report | 85% |
| Denso Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Toyota Motor Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Delphi Automotive PLC | Company report | 85% |
| Yazaki Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| TS Tech Co | Company report | 85% |
| Koch Industries Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Robert Bosch GmbH | Company report | 85% |
| Honda Motor Co. Ltd | Company report | 85% |
| Leoni AG | Company report | 85% |
| Continental AG | Company report | 85% |
| Magna International Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Stoneridge Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Johnson Controls International Plc | Company report | 85% |
| Gentherm Incorporated | Company report | 85% |
| Amphenol Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Eaton Corporation Plc | Company report | 85% |
| Commercial Vehicle Group Inc | Company report | 85% |
Company report basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Lear's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: see Methodology: Peer & Competitor Identification, Sourcing.
Lear's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Lear Corp | Seating 74.94 % |
| Amphenol Corporation | Communications Solutions Segment 64.81 % |
| Eaton Corporation Plc | Electrical Americas 46.63 % |
| Emerson Electric Co | Safety and Productivity 11.33 % |
| Johnson Controls International Plc | Americas 66.79 % |
| Honeywell International Inc | Building Automation 40.45 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's reports (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Lear's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lear Corp | 5,498 | 144,819 | 3,940 |
| Amphenol Corporation | 192,659 | 194,389 | 35,099 |
| Eaton Corporation Plc | 133,134 | 328,705 | 40,102 |
| Emerson Electric Co | 91,095 | 255,301 | 35,329 |
| Johnson Controls International Plc | 82,908 | 108,591 | 16,342 |
| Honeywell International Inc | 70,240 | 304,119 | 69,525 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 814,941 | 454,034 | 82,576 |
Lear's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent report. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Lear Corp | North America 43.96 % |
| Amphenol Corporation | Other foreign locations 47.08 % |
| Cummins Inc | United States 56.10 % |
| Te Connectivity plc | Asia Pacific 36.91 % |
| Emcor Group Inc | UNITED STATES 100.00 % |
| Borgwarner Inc | Europe 34.76 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's reports (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Lear's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 51 companies in Lear's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Lear ranks #9 of 51 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 2.62 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 1,136, indicating a unconcentrated market structure (see Methodology: Market Structure & Concentration).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cummins Inc | 62,335 | 29.15 % |
| 2 | Magna International Inc | 17,475 | 8.17 % |
| 3 | Genuine Parts Co | 16,944 | 7.92 % |
| 4 | Bwx Technologies Inc | 10,997 | 5.14 % |
| 5 | Borgwarner Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Allison Transmission Holdings Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Autoliv Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Aptiv Plc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Lear Corp | 5,605 | 2.62 % |
| 10 | Modine Manufacturing Co | 1,234 | 5.2% |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Lear's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-11-06.
Lear's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Bwx Technologies Inc | 10,997 | -41.72 % |
| 5 | Borgwarner Inc | 10,070 | 7.71 % |
| 6 | Allison Transmission Holdings Inc | 9,818 | 45.05 % |
| 7 | Autoliv Inc | 9,161 | 0.33 % |
| 8 | Aptiv Plc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 9 | Lear Corp | 5,605 | 3.09 % |
| 10 | Modine Manufacturing Co | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 11 | Lkq Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 12 | Brunswick Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 13 | Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 14 | Gentex Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Lear's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-11-06. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Lear's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Auto & Truck Parts industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (88 companies). See the full Auto & Truck Parts industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 6.91 % | 18.13 % (avg) | -11.2 pp |
| Operating Margin | 3.46 % | industry median | -4.9 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 5.99 % | 1.67 % (avg) | +4.3 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 2.79 % | 4.91 % (avg) | -2.1 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Lear's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Auto & Truck Parts industry average (88 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns. See the full Auto & Truck Parts industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 11.8x | 24.9x | -13.1x |
| EV / EBITDA | 6.7x | 12.8x | -6.1x |
| P/B | 1.2x | 2.6x | -1.3x |
| Return on Equity | 12.36 % | industry aggregate | 1.91 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 5.66 % | -0.70 % (avg) | 6.36 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Lear's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in company reports.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 3.33 % | -6.33 % | -13.96 % | 13.01 % | 8.45 % | 12.33 % | -0.69 % | -0.20 % |
| Operating Margin | 7.82 % | 5.40 % | 2.66 % | 3.51 % | 3.13 % | 3.98 % | 3.35 % | 2.91 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 13.96 % | 8.67 % | 3.73 % | 5.09 % | 5.13 % | 7.22 % | 6.22 % | 5.15 % |
| P/E | 8.0x | 10.6x | 58.8x | 29.1x | 24.6x | 14.3x | 11.8x | 13.9x |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Lear's Strategic Group Map
Lear is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC are labeled. See Methodology: Strategic Group Map for how this chart is built.
Lear's trailing-12-month revenue growth of 3.5% and operating margin of 3.5% compares with an average of 2.0% growth and 4.1% margin across its 8 closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC -- Lear sits above that peer average on growth and below it on margin.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Lear's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
See Methodology: BCG Growth-Share Matrix for how relative share and growth are calculated and thresholded.
Lear falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.09x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 4.7% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Lear's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | High | Industry HHI of 1,136 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 2.79 % vs industry average 4.91 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
Note: see Methodology: Porter's Five Forces. Supplier power and buyer power are covered on Lear's dedicated Suppliers and Customers pages, not here.
Lear's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
See Methodology: GE/McKinsey Matrix for how the two axes are built.
Lear falls in the Low attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Harvest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Lear's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
No rule matched.
Weaknesses
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-2.9% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.09x).
Opportunities
- Trades at a lower P/E than the industry average (11.8x vs 24.9x) despite a higher return on invested capital -- a possible re-rating opportunity.
Threats
No rule matched.
Methodology: see Methodology: SWOT Analysis.
Lear's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lear Corp | 0.15 | 1.29 | 0.78 |
| Amphenol Corporation | 0.27 | 2.07 | 1.78 |
| Eaton Corporation Plc | 0.05 | 1.24 | 0.89 |
| Emerson Electric Co | 0.05 | 0.88 | 0.65 |
| Johnson Controls International Plc | 0.05 | 0.96 | 0.70 |
| Honeywell International Inc | 0.47 | 1.24 | 1.69 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Lear's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lear Corp | Q3 2026 | +1.6 % | +8.1 % |
| Amphenol Corporation | Q3 2026 | +65.1 % | +62.1 % |
| Eaton Corporation Plc | Q3 2026 | +28.0 % | +6.7 % |
| Emerson Electric Co | Q2 2026 | +7.0 % | +22.5 % |
| Johnson Controls International Plc | Q1 2026 | +8.2 % | +17.1 % |
| Honeywell International Inc | Q3 2026 | -52.0 % | -64.3 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +9.8 % | +64.4 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Lear's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lear Corp | Q3 2026 | +1.4 % | +24.4 % |
| Amphenol Corporation | Q3 2026 | +62.0 % | +77.8 % |
| Eaton Corporation Plc | Q3 2026 | +35.5 % | +54.5 % |
| Emerson Electric Co | Q2 2026 | +2.7 % | +9.7 % |
| Johnson Controls International Plc | Q1 2026 | +7.6 % | - |
| Honeywell International Inc | Q3 2026 | -5.7 % | - |
Lear's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lear Corp | 4.23% | 6.94% | 12.36% |
| Amphenol Corporation | 14.02% | 14.13% | 39.48% |
| Eaton Corporation Plc | 7.43% | 9.80% | 19.38% |
| Emerson Electric Co | 6.13% | 8.71% | 12.69% |
| Johnson Controls International Plc | 9.33% | 15.77% | 26.03% |
| Honeywell International Inc | 10.10% | 15.11% | 39.45% |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Lear's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Lear Corp | 10.05 | 0.23 |
| Amphenol Corporation | 19.58 | 5.83 |
| Eaton Corporation Plc | 34.21 | 4.16 |
| Emerson Electric Co | 35.53 | 4.89 |
| Johnson Controls International Plc | 24.51 | 3.39 |
| Honeywell International Inc | 10.46 | 2.29 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 6.79 | 1.20 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.