LMT US Equity☆

ITEM 1A. Risk Factors

An investment in our common stock or debt securities involves risks and uncertainties. While we seek to identify, manage and mitigate risks to our business, risk and uncertainty cannot be eliminated or necessarily predicted. The outcome of one or more of these risks could have a material effect on our operating results, financial position, or cash flows. You should carefully consider the following factors, in addition to the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, before deciding to trade in our common stock or debt securities.

Risks Related to our Reliance on Government Contracts, our Industry and the Economy

We depend heavily on contracts with the U.S. Government for a substantial portion of our business. Changes in the U.S. Government’s priorities, or delays or reductions in spending could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We derived 73% of our total consolidated net sales from the U.S. Government in 2024, including 65% from the Department of Defense (DoD). We expect to continue to derive most of our sales from work performed under U.S. Government contracts. A reduction in overall U.S. defense spending, on an absolute or inflation-adjusted basis, because of shifting priorities, budget compromises or otherwise could adversely affect our business. Budget uncertainty, the potential for U.S. Government shutdowns, the use of continuing resolutions, and the federal debt ceiling can adversely affect our industry and the funding for our programs. If appropriations are delayed or a government shutdown were to occur and continue for an extended period, we could be at risk of reduced orders, program cancellations and other disruptions and nonpayment. When the U.S. Government operates under a continuing resolution, new contract and program starts are restricted and funding for our programs may be unavailable, reduced or delayed.

Our contracts with the U.S. Government are conditioned upon the continuing availability of Congressional appropriations. Congress usually appropriates funds on a fiscal year (FY) basis even though contract performance may extend over many years. Consequently, contracts are often partially funded initially, and additional funds are committed only as Congress makes further appropriations over time. To the extent we incur costs in excess of funds obligated on a contract or in advance of a contract award or contract definitization, we are at risk of not being reimbursed for those costs unless and until additional funds are obligated under the contract or the contract is successfully awarded, definitized and funded, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Failure to fund or the termination of significant programs or contracts by the U.S. Government could adversely affect our business and financial performance. DoD’s changes in funding priorities also could reduce opportunities in existing programs and in future programs or initiatives where we intend to compete and where we have made investments. While we would expect to compete and be well positioned as the incumbent on existing programs, we may not be successful and, even if we are successful, the replacement programs may be funded at lower levels or result in lower margins. In addition, our ability to grow in key areas such as hypersonics programs, classified programs and next-generation franchise programs will be affected by the

10

Table of Contents

overall budget environment and whether development programs transition to production and the timing of such transition, all of which are dependent on U.S. Government authorization and funding.

The F-35 program comprises a material portion of our revenue and reductions or delays in funding for this program and risks related to performance, schedule, cost and requirements of the program could adversely affect our performance.

The F-35 program, which consists of multiple development, production and sustainment contracts, is our largest program and represented 26% of our total consolidated net sales in 2024. A decision by the U.S. Government, international partners, or FMS customer countries to cut spending on this program or reduce or delay planned orders would have an adverse impact on our business and results of operations. Given the size and complexity of the F-35 program, we anticipate that there will be continual reviews related to aircraft performance, program and delivery schedule, cost, and requirements as part of the DoD, Congressional, and international countries’ oversight and budgeting processes. Challenges and risks associated with this program include supplier performance, software development, definitizing and receiving funding for contracts on a timely basis, execution of future flight tests and findings resulting from testing and operating the aircraft, the level of cost associated with life cycle operations, sustainment and potential contractual obligations, inflation-related cost pressures, the ability to improve affordability, and potential competition from next-generation or other platforms. See also “Status of the F-35 Program” in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations for a discussion of the current program status and specific challenges and risks.

We also may not be successful in making hardware upgrades and other modernization capabilities in a timely manner, including as a result of dependencies on suppliers, which could increase costs and create schedule delays. Our ability to capture and retain future F-35 growth in development, production and sustainment is dependent on the success of our efforts to achieve F-35 sustainment performance, customer affordability, supply chain improvements, continued reliability improvements and other efficiencies, some of which are outside our control. See also the Risk Factor below captioned “We are heavily dependent on suppliers and if our subcontractors or other suppliers or teaming agreement or joint venture partners fail to perform their obligations, our performance and ability to win future business could be adversely affected” for further discussion.

We are subject to extensive procurement laws and regulations, including those that enable the U.S. Government to terminate contracts for convenience. Our business and reputation could be adversely affected if we or those we do business with fail to comply with these laws and regulations.

We must comply with extensive laws and regulations relating to the award, administration and performance of U.S. Government contracts. Government contract laws and regulations affect how we do business with our customers and impose certain risks and costs on our business. A violation of these laws and regulations by us, our employees, others working on our behalf, a supplier or a joint venture partner could harm our reputation and result in the imposition of fines and penalties, the termination of our contracts, suspension or debarment from bidding on or being awarded contracts, loss of our ability to export products or perform services and civil or criminal investigations or proceedings. From time to time, the U.S. Government has proposed contract terms, imposed internal policies, or taken positions that represent fundamental changes from historical practices or that we believe are inconsistent with the FAR or other laws and regulations and that could adversely affect our business. In addition, costs to comply with new government regulations can increase our costs, reduce our margins and adversely affect our competitiveness. Also, a portion of our contracts are classified by the U.S. Government, which imposes security requirements that limit our ability to discuss our performance on these contracts, including any specific risks, disputes and claims.

Contract Termination. The U.S. Government may terminate any of our government contracts at its convenience or for default based on our performance, either of which could adversely affect our business and financial performance. Generally, prime contractors have similar termination rights under subcontracts related to government contracts. If a contract is terminated for convenience, we generally are protected by provisions covering reimbursement for costs incurred on the contract and profit on those costs. However, to the extent insufficient funds have been appropriated by the U.S. Government to cover our costs upon a termination for convenience, the U.S. Government may assert that it is not required to appropriate additional funding. If a contract is terminated for default, the U.S. Government could make claims to reduce our recovery or recoup its procurement costs and could assess other special penalties, exposing us to liability and adversely affecting our ability to compete for future contracts and orders. In addition, the U.S. Government could terminate a prime contract under which we are a subcontractor, notwithstanding the fact that our performance and the quality of the products or services we delivered were consistent with our contractual obligations as a subcontractor.

Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA). When operating under a undefinitized contract action (UCA), which is when we begin performing our obligations before the terms, specifications or price are finally agreed to between the parties, the U.S. Government has the right to unilaterally definitize contracts, which it has exercised in the past and which, absent a successful appeal, obligates us to perform under terms and conditions imposed by the U.S. Government. This can affect our ability to negotiate mutually agreeable contract terms. If a contract is unilaterally imposed upon us, it may negatively affect our expected profit and cash flows on a program or impose burdensome terms.

11

Table of Contents

Bid Protests. U.S Government procurement laws permit legal challenges, referred to as bid protests, to the terms of a contract solicitation or the award of a contract. We may encounter bid protests from unsuccessful bidders on new program awards seeking to overturn the award. Unsuccessful bidders also may protest with the goal of being awarded a subcontract for a portion of the work in return for withdrawing the protest. Bid protests can result in significant expenses to us, contract modifications or even loss of the contract award and the resolution can extend the time until contract activity can begin and delay the recognition of sales and defer underlying cash flows and adversely affect our operating results. Our efforts to protest or challenge any bids for contracts that were not awarded to us also may be unsuccessful.

Competition and changing procurement policies could adversely affect our business and financial results.

We operate in a highly competitive industry and our competitors may have more extensive or more specialized engineering, technical, marketing and servicing capabilities than we do in certain areas. Our competitors may develop new technologies, products or services that could replace our current offerings. Additionally, if competitors can offer lower cost services and products, or provide services or products more quickly, at equivalent or in some cases even reduced capabilities, we may lose new business opportunities or contract recompetes, which could adversely affect our future results. We are facing increased competition from startups and non-traditional defense contractors, which may have a lower cost structure or be able to move more quickly in addition to being favored, in certain cases, by procurement policy. Furthermore, acquisitions in our industry, including vertical integration, also could result in increased competition or limit our access to certain suppliers without appropriate remedies to protect our interests.

A substantial portion of our business is awarded through competitive bidding. The U.S. Government increasingly has relied on competitive contract award types, including indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity and other multi-award contracts, which have the potential to create pricing pressure and to increase our costs by requiring us to submit multiple bids and proposals. Multi-award contracts require us to make sustained efforts to obtain task orders under the contract. Additionally, procurements that do not evaluate whether the cost assumptions in the bids are realistic can lead to bidders taking aggressive pricing positions, which could result in the winner realizing a loss upon contract award or an increased risk of lower margins or realizing a loss over the term of the contract. Competitors may be willing to accept more risk or lower profitability in competing for contracts than we are. The U.S. Government also may not award us large competitive contracts that we otherwise might have won in an effort to strengthen a broad industrial base.

U.S. Government procurement policies and procedures and the application thereof are regularly changing, and such changes could adversely affect our profitability or the ability to win new business. For example, an increase in the use of contract structures that shift risk to the contractor, such as fixed-price development contracts and incentive-based fee arrangements, or the U.S Government using different award fee criteria than historically used (such as the evaluation of environmental factors) could adversely affect our profit rates or make it more difficult to win new contracts. The DoD is increasingly pursuing rapid acquisition pathways and procedures for new technologies, including through so called “other transaction authority” agreements (OTAs). OTAs are exempt from many traditional procurement laws, including the FAR, and an OTA award may be subject, in certain cases, to the condition that a significant portion of the work under the OTA is performed by a non-traditional defense contractor or that a portion of the cost of the protype project is funded by non-governmental sources. Changes in regulations or interpretations of what are allowable costs under our government contracts could adversely impact our profitability and changes in contract financing policy for fixed-price contracts, such as changes in performance and progress payments policies, could significantly affect the timing of our cash flows.

Our profitability and cash flow may vary based on the mix of our contracts and programs, our performance, and our ability to control costs.

Our profitability and cash flow may vary materially depending on the types of government contracts undertaken, the nature of products produced or services performed under those contracts, the costs incurred in performing the work, the achievement of other performance objectives and the stage of performance at which the right to receive fees is determined, particularly under award and incentive-fee contracts. Failure to perform to customer expectations and contract requirements may result in reduced fees or losses and may adversely affect our financial performance.

Contract types primarily include fixed-price and cost-reimbursable contracts. Cost-reimbursable contracts provide for the payment of allowable costs incurred during performance of the contract plus a fee up to a ceiling based on the amount that has been funded. Cost, schedule or technical performance issues with respect to cost-reimbursable contracts could result in reduced fees, lower profit rates, or program cancellation. Fixed-price contracts are predominantly either firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts or fixed-price incentive (FPI) contracts. Under FFP contracts, we receive a fixed price irrespective of the actual costs we incur and therefore we carry the burden of any cost overruns. Under FPI contracts the U.S. Government is responsible for our costs up to a negotiated ceiling price and we generally share, based on a negotiated sharing formula, savings from cost underruns and expenses, up to the negotiated ceiling price, from cost overruns. We bear the risk for all cost overruns that exceed the negotiated ceiling price. Due to the fixed-price nature of the contracts, if our actual costs exceed our estimates, our margins and profits are reduced and we could incur a reach-forward loss. A reach-forward loss is when estimates of total costs to be incurred on a

12

Table of Contents

contract exceed total estimates of the transaction price. When this occurs, a provision for the entire loss is determined at the contract level and is recorded in the period in which the loss is evident.

Under both fixed-price and cost-reimbursable contracts, if we are unable to control costs, our operating results could be adversely affected. Costs to complete a contract may increase for many reasons, including technical and manufacturing challenges, schedule delays, workforce-related issues, inaccurate initial contract cost estimates, the timeliness and availability of materials from suppliers, internal and subcontractor performance or product quality issues, inability to meet cost reduction initiatives or achieve efficiencies from digital transformation, changing laws or regulations, inflation and natural disasters. Certain contracts may impose other risks, such as forfeiting fees, paying penalties, or providing replacement systems in the event of performance failure.

Contracts for development programs include complex design and technical requirements and are often contracted on a cost-reimbursable basis, however, some of our existing development programs are contracted on a fixed-price basis. In addition, we have certain contracts where we bid upfront on cost-reimbursable development work and the follow-on fixed-price production options in one submission. We expect we also will bid on similar programs in the future. Fixed-price development work or fixed-price production options, especially on competitively bid programs, is inherently riskier than cost-reimbursable work because the revenue is fixed, while the estimates of costs required to complete these contracts are subject to significant variability due to the nature of development programs. The technical complexity coupled with the fixed-price contract structure of certain of our ongoing development programs or new programs increases the risk that our costs will be greater than anticipated, resulting in reduced margins, operating profit, or reach-forward losses during the period of contract performance or upon contract award, all of which could be significant to our financial condition and operating results. Bidding upfront on fixed-price production options increases the risk that we may experience lower margins than expected, or a loss, on the production options because we must estimate the cost of producing a product before it has been developed. These risks may cause us not to bid on certain future programs, which could adversely affect our future growth prospects and financial performance. See Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further details about losses incurred on certain programs, including fixed-price development programs.

Contracts for the transition from development to production (e.g., low rate initial production (LRIP) contracts) also create performance and financial risks to our business because of the challenge of starting and stabilizing a manufacturing production and test line while concurrently validating final design and managing change in requirements or capabilities requested by the customer.

Many of our contracts include multiple option years exercisable at the customer’s discretion, which carries risk. The customer may decline to exercise an option, or the customer may exercise an option on a contract for which we expect to incur a loss or perform at a low margin, either of which could adversely affect our financial results.

We are routinely subject to audit by our customers on government contracts, including audits relating to our disclosed Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) rate structure or any changes to our CAS rate structure and the results of those audits could have an adverse effect on our business, reputation and results of operations

U.S. Government agencies, including the Defense Contract Audit Agency, the Defense Contract Management Agency and various agency Inspectors General, routinely audit and investigate government contractors. These agencies review a contractor’s compliance with applicable laws, regulations and contract terms, regarding, among other things, contract pricing, contract performance, cost structure and business systems. U.S. Government audits and investigations often take years to complete, and many result in no adverse action against us. Like many U.S. Government contractors, we have received audit and investigative reports recommending the reduction of certain contract prices or that certain payments be repaid, delayed, or withheld, and may involve substantial amounts. Similarly, like other U.S. Government contractors, audits and investigations also occur related to cost reimbursements that are based upon our final allowable incurred costs for each year. We have unaudited or unsettled incurred cost claims related to past years, which limits our ability to issue final billings on contracts for which authorized and appropriated funds may be expiring or can result in delays in final billings and our ability to close out a contract. These audits could result in unanticipated changes to contract prices and the amount and timing of payments, which could affect profitability and cash flows for any particular reporting period. These changes could have a material impact on financial condition and results of operations in such period.

If an audit or investigation uncovers improper or illegal activities, we may be subject to civil or criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including reductions of the value of contracts, contract modifications or terminations, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, repayments, penalties, fines or suspension or debarment from doing business with the U.S. Government. Reductions in the value of contracts, contract modifications or terminations, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, repayments, penalties, and fines could have a material impact on financial condition and results of operations in any particular reporting period, and suspension or debarment could have a material adverse effect on us because of our dependence on contracts with the U.S. Government. In addition, we could suffer serious reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against us. Similar government oversight and risks to our business and reputation exist in most other countries where we conduct business.

13

Table of Contents

Other Risks Related to our Operations

We are heavily dependent on suppliers and if our subcontractors or other suppliers or teaming agreement or joint venture partners fail to perform their obligations, our performance and ability to win future business could be adversely affected.

We are the prime contractor on most of our contracts and rely on other companies to provide materials, major components and products, and to perform a portion of the services that are provided to our customers under the terms of most of our contracts. These arrangements may involve subcontracts, teaming arrangements, joint ventures, or supply agreements with other companies on which we rely (contracting parties) and, in many cases, our contracting parties in turn rely on lower-tier subcontractors. We sometimes have disputes with our contracting parties, including disputes regarding the cost, quality and timeliness of work performed, workshares, customer concerns about the other party’s performance, issues related to lower-tier subcontractor performance, our failure to issue or extend task orders, or our hiring the personnel of a subcontractor, teammate or joint venture partner or vice versa. We also could be adversely affected by actions or issues experienced by our contracting parties that are outside of our control, such as misconduct and reputational issues involving our contracting parties, which could subject us to liability or adversely affect our ability to compete for contract awards. The financial stability and viability of our contracting parties or lower-tier subcontractors have and in the future could adversely affect their ability to meet their performance obligation.

A failure by one or more of our contracting parties to provide the agreed-upon materials, components or products, or perform the agreed-upon services, on a timely basis, according to specifications, including compliance with regulatory requirements we flow down from our prime contracts, or at all, has and may adversely affect our ability to perform our obligations and require that we transition the work to other companies. Contracting party performance deficiencies may result in additional costs or delays in product deliveries and affect our operating results and could result in a customer terminating our contract for default or convenience. A default termination could expose us to liability and affect our ability to compete for future contracts and orders. A failure by our contracting parties to meet affordability targets could negatively affect our profitability, result in contract losses and affect our ability to win new business.

Additionally, we are affected by government procurement restrictions and issues affecting industry supply chains broadly. For example, U.S. Government statutes and regulations impose restrictions on the sourcing of items from specified countries. We seek to manage supply risk through long-term contracts, identifying domestic or other U.S. allied alternative sources of items and maintaining an acceptable level of our key materials in inventories. Advanced microelectronics, including semiconductors, underpin many of our current and future critical technologies and platforms, and global shortages of these products due to increased demand or other supply chain challenges could result in increased procurement lead times and increased costs and potential shortages, which could affect our performance. We also must comply with specific procurement requirements that can limit the number of eligible suppliers, and a significant number of the components or supplies used are currently single or sole sourced. Because the identification and qualification of new or additional suppliers can take an extended period of time and can result in additional cost, issues with suppliers or trade actions that limit our ability to use certain suppliers, especially when single or sole sourced, can have an adverse impact on our business. Complying with U.S. Government contracting regulations that limit the source or manufacture of suppliers and impose stringent cybersecurity regulations also may create challenges for our supply chain and increase costs.

We remain heavily dependent on our supply chain for sourcing contractually compliant components, which is outside of our direct control and is multi-tiered. The future occurrence of non-compliant components in our programs could cause suspensions in product deliveries, remediation work on installed components, contract price adjustments and alternate supply sourcing, all of which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to develop new technologies, products and services and efficiently produce and deliver existing products.

Many of the products and services we provide are highly engineered and involve sophisticated technologies with related complex manufacturing and systems integration processes. Our customers’ requirements change and evolve regularly. Accordingly, our future performance depends, in part, on our ability to adapt to changing customer needs rapidly, identify emerging technological trends, develop and manufacture innovative products and services efficiently and bring those offerings to market quickly at cost-effective prices. This includes efforts to provide mission solutions that integrate capabilities and resources across all forces and domains, which we refer to as joint all domain operations, and to implement emerging digital and network technologies and capabilities. Artificial intelligence technologies have rapidly developed and our business may be adversely affected if we cannot successfully integrate the technology into our internal business processes and product and service offerings in a timely, cost-effective, compliant and responsible manner. To advance our innovation and position us to meet our customers’ requirements, we make investments in emerging technologies that we believe are needed to keep pace with rapid industry innovation and seek to collaborate with commercial entities that we believe have complementary technologies to ours. These commercial entities may not be accustomed to government contracting and may be unwilling to agree to the government’s customary terms, including with respect to intellectual property, liability and indemnification term, which may

14

Table of Contents

prevent or lessen the benefit of collaboration. We may not be successful in identifying or developing emerging technologies and may spend significant resources on projects that ultimately are unsuccessful or yield a low return on the amount invested.

Our future success in delivering innovative and affordable solutions to our customers relies, in part, on our multi-year business transformation initiative that seeks to significantly enhance our digital infrastructure to increase efficiencies and collaboration throughout our business while reducing costs. This digital transformation effort requires substantial investment and if we are unable to successfully implement the strategy or do so in a timely manner, our results of operations and future competitiveness may be adversely affected.

If we fail in our development projects or if our new products or technologies fail to achieve customer acceptance or competitors develop more capable technologies or offerings or develop new technologies or offerings faster, we may be unsuccessful in obtaining new contracts or winning all or a portion of next generation programs, including in key areas such as hypersonics and classified work, and this could adversely affect our future performance and financial results.

Geopolitical, macroeconomic and public health events and conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

Geopolitical. Changes in U.S. government and other nations’ administration and their associated shifts in policy and priorities could also impact our operations and market conditions. Our business is highly sensitive to geopolitical and security issues, including foreign policy actions taken by governments such as tariffs, sanctions, embargoes, export and import controls, and other trade restrictions, which can affect the demand for, and our ability to sell, our products and services, cause disruptions to our supply chain, and, ultimately, could adversely affect our business.

Global conflicts, including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, conflicts in the Middle East, and heightened tensions in the Pacific region, have significantly elevated global geopolitical tensions and security concerns and resulted in increased demand for some of our products and services. However, if we are unable to increase production to meet demand in the timeframe expected by potential customers, whether due to supply constraints, government funding, or otherwise, then we may lose sales opportunities as those possible customers seek alternatives, even less capable ones, that may be delivered more quickly. Furthermore, the level of continuing demand and our ability to sell to customers to meet that demand is subject in part to changes in government policies and priorities.

Economic sanctions, export controls, and other trade restrictions, for instance those that the U.S. Government and other nations implemented against Russia in light of its invasion of Ukraine or those relating to the conflict in the Middle East, could directly and indirectly result in the disruption of our business and supply chain. Conflicts in Ukraine and elsewhere have increased the threat of malicious cyber activity from nation states and other actors. China has placed restrictions on and sanctioned our company and certain executives in connection with foreign military sales by the U.S. Government to Taiwan involving our products and services. We will continue to follow official U.S. Government guidance as it relates to sales to Taiwan and do not currently expect a material impact to our business from these actions. In 2023, China also implemented broad-based export restrictions on certain minerals used in the production of, among other things, semiconductors and missile systems; in 2024, China specifically banned export of certain minerals to the U.S. China may impose additional sanctions that could adversely affect Lockheed Martin, our suppliers, teammates and/or partners in the future.

Our international sales also could be adversely affected by actions taken by the U.S. Government, including the exercise of foreign policy, Congressional oversight or the financing of particular programs, that may prevent, restrict or otherwise impose conditions upon the sale and delivery of our products or the transfer of sensitive technology. For example, the U.S. Government has imposed certain sanctions on Türkish entities and persons, which has affected our ability to obtain certain U.S. export permits or authorizations necessary to perform under our existing contracts supporting the Türkish Utility Helicopter Program (TUHP), and could impact our work with Türkish industry and our opportunity for sales in Türkiye generally. See “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on TUHP. Our inability to perform under, or compete for, contracts with international customers because of actions taken by the U.S. Government has resulted and may in the future result in our inability to recover our costs, incurrence of reach-forward losses, claims and contract terminations by these customers and suppliers, and limitations on our ability to pursue new business, which could have an adverse effect on our operating results.

Macroeconomic. Heightened levels of inflation and the potential worsening of macroeconomic conditions, including slower growth or recession, changes to fiscal and monetary policy, tighter credit, higher interest rates and currency fluctuations, present risks for us, our suppliers and the stability of the broader defense industrial base. If we are unable to successfully mitigate the impact, our future profits, margins and cash flows, particularly for existing fixed-price contracts, may be adversely affected. Although we believe defense spending is more resilient to adverse macroeconomic conditions than many other industrial sectors, our suppliers and other partners, many of which are more exposed to commercial markets or have fewer resources, may be adversely impacted to a more significant degree than we are by an economic downturn. Such an impact could affect their performance and adversely impact our operations. In addition, macroeconomic conditions could cause budgetary

15

Table of Contents

pressures for our government customers resulting in reductions or delays in spending, which could adversely impact our business. Higher interest rates increase the borrowing costs on new debt and could affect the fair value of our investments. Interest rates also impact our pension. For example, higher interest rates generally reduce the measure of our gross pension obligations while lower interest rates increase it.

Public health. We face a wide variety of risks related to public health crises, epidemics, pandemics or similar events. If a new health epidemic or outbreak were to occur, we could experience broad and varied effects similar to the impact of COVID-19, including adverse impacts to our workforce and supply chain, inflationary pressures and increased costs, schedule or production delays, market volatility and other financial ramifications. If any of these were to occur, our future results and performance could be adversely impacted.

International sales may pose different economic, regulatory, competition and other risks.

International sales present risks that are different and potentially greater than those encountered in our U.S. business. In 2024, 26% of our total net sales were associated with international customers. International sales are subject to numerous political and economic factors, including changes in foreign national priorities, foreign government budgets, global economic conditions, and fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, the possibility of trade sanctions and other government actions, regulatory requirements, significant competition, taxation, and other risks associated with doing business outside the U.S. Sales of military products and services and any associated industrial development (offset) agreements are subject to U.S. export regulations and foreign policy, and there could be significant delays or other issues in reaching definitive agreements for announced programs. See the Risk Factor “Geopolitical, macroeconomic and public health events and conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.” Competition for international sales is intense, including from international manufacturers whose governments sometimes provide research and development assistance, marketing subsidies and other assistance for their products and services.

Our international business is conducted through FMS contracted through the U.S. Government and by direct commercial sales (DCS) to international customers. FMS contracts with the U.S. Government are subject to the FAR and the DFARS. Because the U.S. Government functions as an intermediary in FMS sales, we are reliant on, and could be adversely impacted by, the capacity and speed of the DoD’s administration of requests from non-U.S. countries to convert requests to sales. In contrast, DCS transactions represent sales directly to international customers and are subject to U.S. and foreign laws and regulations, including product testing, import-export control, technology transfer restrictions, investments, taxation, repatriation of earnings, exchange controls, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and other anti-corruption laws and regulations, and the anti-boycott provisions of the U.S. Export Control Reform Act of 2018. While we have extensive policies in place to comply with such laws and regulations, failure by us, our employees or others working on our behalf to comply with these laws and regulations could result in administrative, civil, or criminal liabilities, including suspension, debarment from bidding for or performing government contracts, or suspension of our export privileges, which could have a material adverse effect on us. We frequently team with international subcontractors and suppliers who also are exposed to similar risks.

We believe DCS transactions present a higher level of potential risks because they involve direct commercial relationships with parties with which we typically have less familiarity. Additionally, international procurement and local country rules and regulations, contract laws and judicial systems differ from those in the U.S. and, in some cases, may be less predictable than those in the U.S., which could impair our ability to enforce contracts and increase the risk of adverse or unpredictable outcomes, including the possibility that certain matters that would be considered civil matters in the U.S. are treated as criminal matters in other countries.

In conjunction with defense procurements, some international customers require contractors to comply with industrial cooperation regulations, including entering into industrial participation, industrial development or localization agreements, sometimes referred to as offset agreements (also known as offset contracts), as a condition to obtaining orders for our products and services. These offset agreements generally extend over several years and obligate the contractor to perform certain commitments, which may include in-country purchases, technology transfers, local manufacturing support, consulting support to in-country projects, investments in joint ventures and financial support projects, and preference for local suppliers or subcontractors. The customer’s expectations in respect of the scope of offset commitments can be substantial, including high-value content, and may exceed existing local technical capability. Failure to meet these commitments, which can be subjective and outside of our control, may result in significant penalties, and could lead to a reduction in sales to a country. Furthermore, some of our existing offset agreements are dependent upon the successful operation of joint ventures that we do not control and involve products and services that are outside of our core business, which may increase the risk of breaching our obligations, exposing us to compliance risks of the joint venture, and impairing our ability to recover our investment. For more information on our industrial development obligations, including the notional value of our remaining industrial development obligations and potential penalties for non-compliance, see “Contractual Commitments” in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

16

Table of Contents

We may be unable to benefit fully from or adequately protect our intellectual property rights or use third-party intellectual property, which could negatively affect our business.

We own a substantial number of U.S. and foreign patents and trademarks related to the products and services we provide. In addition to owning a large portfolio of patents and trademarks, we develop and own other intellectual property, including copyrights, trade secrets and research, development and engineering know-how, which contribute significantly to our business. We also license intellectual property to and from third parties. The FAR and DFARS provide that the U.S. Government obtains certain rights in intellectual property, including patents, developed by us and our subcontractors and suppliers in performance of government contracts or with government funding. The U.S. Government may use, or may authorize others including competitors to use, such intellectual property. Non-U.S. governments also may have certain rights in patents and other intellectual property developed in performance of our contracts with these entities. The U.S. Government is pursuing aggressive positions on the acquisition of broad data and software packages as well as the scope and applicability of these rights once acquired. The DoD is also implementing an overarching intellectual property acquisition policy that will require a greater focus and planning as to intellectual property rights for its programs, with the potential impacts of this policy or any associated regulatory changes on future acquisitions yet to be determined. The DoD’s efforts could affect our ability to protect and exploit our intellectual property and to leverage supplier intellectual property, for example, if we are unable to obtain necessary licenses from our suppliers to meet government requirements. Additionally, third parties may assert that our products or services infringe their intellectual property rights, which could result in costly and time-consuming disputes, subject us to damages and injunctions and adversely affect our ability to compete and perform on certain contracts.

Our business and financial performance depends on us identifying, attracting and retaining a highly skilled workforce.

Our performance is dependent upon us identifying, attracting, developing, motivating and retaining a highly skilled workforce with the requisite skills in multiple areas including engineering, science, manufacturing, information technology, cybersecurity, business development and strategy and management. Due to the national security nature of our work, our performance is also dependent upon personnel who hold security clearances and receive substantial training to work on certain programs or tasks and can be difficult to replace on a timely basis if we experience unplanned attrition. The market for highly skilled workers and leaders in our industry as well as the market for individuals holding high-level security clearances is extremely competitive and not confined to our industry. For example, we compete with commercial technology companies outside of the aerospace and defense industry for qualified technical, cyber and scientific positions, which may not face the same type of cost pressures as a government contractor and which may be able to offer more flexible work arrangements given that certain of our employees must perform the majority of their work in a secure facility because of the need to access classified information. If we cannot adequately attract and retain personnel with the requisite skills or clearances in this competitive market, our performance and future prospects may be adversely affected.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, we have implemented flexible work arrangements and a hybrid workforce model, where portions of our workforce work remotely while others are required to be on-site in our facilities depending on, among other things, the nature of the job performed, business needs, and evolving circumstances. In conjunction with this, it is critical that we develop and train employees, hire new qualified personnel, and successfully manage the short and long-term transfer of critical knowledge and skills, including leadership development and succession planning throughout our business. While we have processes in place for management transition and the transfer of knowledge and skills, the loss of key personnel, coupled with an inability to adequately train other personnel, hire new personnel or transfer knowledge and skills, could significantly impact our ability to perform under our contracts and execute on new or growing programs.

Additionally, approximately 19% of our workforce is comprised of employees that are covered by collective bargaining agreements with various unions. If we encounter difficulties with renegotiations or renewals of collective bargaining arrangements or are unsuccessful in those efforts, we could incur additional costs and experience work stoppages. Union actions at suppliers also can affect us. Any delays or work stoppages could adversely affect our ability to perform under our contracts, which could negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations.

Cyber-attacks and other security threats and disruptions could have a material adverse effect on our business.

As an aerospace and defense company, we face a multitude of security threats, including cybersecurity threats ranging from attacks common to most industries, such as ransomware and denial-of-service, to attacks from more advanced and persistent, highly organized adversaries, including nation state actors, some of which target the defense industrial base and other critical infrastructure sectors. The sophistication of the threats continues to evolve and grow, including the risk associated with the use of emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing, for nefarious purposes. In addition to cybersecurity threats, we face threats to the security of our facilities and employees from terrorist acts, sabotage and other disruptions, any of which could adversely affect our business. The improper conduct of our employees or others working on our

17

Table of Contents

behalf who have access to export controlled, classified or other sensitive information could also adversely affect our business and reputation.

If we are unable to protect sensitive information, including by complying with evolving information security, data protection and privacy regulations and related disclosure requirements, our customers or governmental authorities could investigate the adequacy of our threat mitigation and detection processes and procedures; and could bring actions against us for noncompliance with applicable laws and regulations. Moreover, depending on the severity of an incident, our customers’ data, our employees’ data, our intellectual property (including trade secrets and research, development and engineering know-how) and other third-party data (such as that of subcontractors, suppliers and vendors) could be compromised, which could adversely affect our business. Products and services we provide to customers also carry cybersecurity risks, including risks that they could be breached or fail to detect, prevent or combat attacks, which could result in losses to our customers and claims against us, and could harm our relationships with our customers and financial results.

Given the persistence, sophistication, volume and novelty of threats we face, we may not be successful in preventing or mitigating an attack that could have a material adverse effect on us and the costs related to cyber or other security threats or disruptions may not be fully insured or indemnified by other means. The national security aspects of our business and much of the data we protect increase and create different risks relative to other industries. National security considerations may also preclude us from publicly disclosing a cybersecurity incident.

Our customers (including sites that we operate and manage for our customers), suppliers, subcontractors, joint venture partners and acquired entities face similar security threats and an incident at one of these entities could adversely impact our business. These entities are typically outside our control and may have access to our information with varying levels of security and cybersecurity resources, expertise, safeguards and capabilities. Their relationships with government contractors, including us, may increase the risk that they are targeted by the same threats we face, however, they may not be as prepared for such threats. Adversaries actively seek to exploit security and cybersecurity weaknesses in our supply chain. Breaches in our multi-tiered supply chain, which is comprised of thousands of direct and indirect suppliers, have and could in the future compromise our data and adversely affect customer deliverables. We also must rely on our supply chain for adequately detecting and reporting cyber incidents, which could affect our ability to report or respond to cybersecurity incidents effectively or in a timely manner.

For information on our cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance, see Item 1C. – Cybersecurity.

If we fail to successfully complete or manage acquisitions, divestitures, equity investments and other transactions or if acquired entities or equity investments fail to perform as expected, our financial results, business and future prospects could be harmed.

In pursuing our business strategy, we routinely conduct discussions, evaluate companies, and enter into agreements regarding possible acquisitions, joint ventures, other investments and divestitures. We seek to identify acquisition or investment opportunities that will expand or complement our existing products and services or customer base, at reasonable valuations. To be successful, we must conduct due diligence to identify valuation issues and potential loss contingencies or underlying risks, some of which are difficult to discover or assess prior to consummation of an acquisition or investment; negotiate transaction terms; complete and close complex transactions; integrate acquired companies and employees; and realize anticipated operating synergies efficiently and effectively. U.S. regulators have increased their scrutiny of mergers and acquisitions in recent years, which could continue to limit our ability to execute certain transactions that we might otherwise pursue.

Acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures and investments often require substantial management resources and have the potential to divert our attention from our existing business. Unidentified or identified but uncertain liabilities that are not covered by indemnification or other coverage could adversely affect our future financial results. This is particularly the case in respect of successor liability under procurement laws and regulations such as the False Claims Act or the Truthful Cost or Pricing Data Act (formerly the Truth in Negotiations Act), anti-corruption, environmental, tax, import-export and technology transfer laws, which provide for civil and criminal penalties and the potential for debarment. We also may incur unanticipated costs or expenses, including post-closing asset impairment charges, expenses associated with eliminating duplicate facilities, employee retention, transaction-related or other litigation, and other liabilities. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Joint ventures and other noncontrolling investments operate under shared control with other parties. These investments typically face many of the same risks and uncertainties as we do, but may expose us to additional risks not present if we retained full control. A joint venture partner may have economic or other business interests that are inconsistent with ours and we may be unable to prevent strategic decisions that may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of

18

Table of Contents

operations. We also could be adversely affected by, or liable for, actions taken by these joint ventures that we do not control, including violations of anti-corruption, import and export, taxation and anti-boycott laws.

Depending on our rights and percentage of ownership, we may consolidate the financial results of such entities or account for our interests under the equity method. Under the equity method of accounting for nonconsolidated ventures and investments, we recognize our share of the operating profit or loss of these joint ventures in our results of operations. Our operating results are affected by the conduct and performance of businesses over which we do not exercise control and, as a result, we may not be successful in achieving the growth or other intended benefits of strategic investments.

We make investments in early-stage companies that we believe are advancing or developing new technologies applicable to our business. These investments are generally illiquid at the time of investment and typically we hold a non-controlling interest. We have and expect to continue to recognize gains or losses attributable to adjustments of the investments’ fair value, including impairments up to and including the full value of the investment, which events are generally outside of our control such as the success or failure of the company and market volatility.

Risks Related to Significant Contingencies, Uncertainties and Estimates, including Pension, Taxes, Environmental and Litigation Costs

Pension funding requirements and costs are dependent on return on pension assets and other economic and actuarial assumptions which if changed may cause our future earnings and cash flow to fluctuate significantly and affect the affordability of our products and services.

Many of our employees and retirees participate in defined benefit pension plans, retiree medical and life insurance plans, and other postemployment plans (collectively, postretirement benefit plans). The impact of these plans on our earnings may be volatile in that the amount of expense or income we record for our postretirement benefit plans may materially change from year to year because the calculations are sensitive to changes in several key economic assumptions, including interest rates and rates of return on plan assets, other actuarial assumptions, including participant longevity (also known as mortality), as well as the timing of cash funding. Changes in these factors, including actual returns on plan assets, may also affect our plan funding, cash flows and stockholders’ equity. We could be required to make pension contributions earlier than and/or in excess of what was planned if our return on pension assets is less than our assumptions, which would reduce our free cash flow.

We have made substantial cash contributions to our plans as required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), as amended, and in accordance with U.S. Government Cost Accounting Standards (CAS), and expect to make future contributions as required or when deemed prudent. We generally can recover a significant portion of these contributions related to our plans as allowable costs on our U.S. Government contracts, including FMS. However, there can be differences between the time when we contribute cash to our plans under pension funding rules and when we recover pension costs under CAS, which can affect the timing of our cash flows. Our business segments’ results of operations include pension expense as calculated under CAS while our consolidated financial statements must present pension income or expense in accordance with U.S. GAAP Financial Accounting Standards (FAS); differences in these accounting rules may result in significant period adjustments referred to as our FAS/CAS pension adjustments.

In recent years, we have taken actions intended to mitigate the risk related to our defined benefit pension plans including pension risk transfer transactions whereby we purchase group annuity contracts (GACs) from insurance companies using assets from the pension trust. We expect to continue to evaluate such transactions in the future. Although under the majority of the GACs we have purchased, we are relieved of all responsibility for the associated pension obligations, we have purchased and may in the future purchase GACs whereby the insurance company reimburses the pension plans but we remain responsible for paying benefits under the plans to covered retirees and beneficiaries and are subject to the risk that the insurance company will default on its obligations to reimburse the pension trust. While we believe pension risk transfer transactions are beneficial, future transactions, depending on their size, could result in us making additional contributions to the pension trust and/or require us to recognize noncash settlement charges in earnings in the applicable reporting period.

For more information on how these factors could impact financial condition and results of operations, see “Critical Accounting Policies – Postretirement Benefit Plans” in the MD&A and “Note 11 – Postretirement Benefit Plans” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

19

Table of Contents

Our estimates and projections may prove to be inaccurate and certain of our assets may be at risk of future impairment.

The accounting for some of our most significant activities is based on judgments and estimates, which are complex and subject to many variables. For example, accounting for sales using the percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost method requires that we assess risks and make assumptions regarding future schedule, cost, technical and performance issues for thousands of contracts, many of which are long-term in nature. This process can be especially difficult when estimating costs for development programs because of the inherent uncertainty in developing a new product or technology. Because of the significance of the judgments and estimation processes involved in accounting for our contracts, materially different amounts of revenue and operating profit could be recorded if we used different assumptions or if the underlying circumstances were to change. Changes in underlying assumptions, circumstances or estimates may adversely affect our future financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, we initially allocate the purchase price of acquired businesses based on a preliminary assessment of the fair value of identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed. For acquisitions we may use a one-year measurement period to analyze and assess several factors used in establishing the asset and liability fair values as of the acquisition date which could result in adjustments to asset and liability balances.

We have $11.1 billion of goodwill assets recorded on our consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2024 from previous acquisitions, which represents approximately 20% of our total assets. These goodwill assets are subject to annual impairment testing and more frequent testing upon the occurrence of certain events or significant changes in circumstances that indicate goodwill may be impaired. If we experience changes or factors arise that negatively affect the expected cash flows of a reporting unit, we may be required to write off all or a portion of the reporting unit’s related goodwill assets.

Actual financial results could differ from our judgments and estimates. See “Critical Accounting Policies” in the MD&A and Results of Operations and “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a complete discussion of our significant accounting policies and use of estimates.

Changes in tax laws and regulations or exposure to additional tax liabilities could adversely affect our financial results.

Changes in U.S. (federal or state) or foreign tax laws and regulations, or their interpretation and application, including those with retroactive effect, could result in increases in our tax expense and affect profitability and cash flows. For example, beginning in 2022, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the option to deduct research and development expenditures immediately in the year incurred and requires taxpayers to amortize such expenditures over five years for tax purposes (research and development capitalization). While the most significant impact of this provision was to cash tax liability for 2022, the tax year in which the provision took effect, the impact will continue over the five-year amortization period, but decline to an immaterial amount in year six.

The amount of net deferred tax assets will change periodically based on several factors, including the measurement of our postretirement benefit plan obligations, actual cash contributions to our postretirement benefit plans, change in the amount or reevaluation of uncertain tax positions, and future changes in tax laws. In addition, we are regularly under audit or examination by tax authorities, including foreign tax authorities. The final resolution of tax audits and any related administrative reviews or litigation could result in unanticipated increases in our tax expense and changes to the timing of required tax payments, which could affect profitability and cash flows for any particular reporting period. These increases or changes could have a material impact on financial condition and results of operations in such period.

Our business involves significant risks and uncertainties that may not be covered by indemnity or insurance.

A significant portion of our business relates to designing, developing and manufacturing advanced defense and technology products and systems. New technologies may be untested or unproven. Failure of some of these products and services could result in extensive loss of life or property damage. Accordingly, we may incur liabilities that are unique to our products and services. In some but not all circumstances, we may be entitled to certain legal protections or indemnifications from our customers, either through U.S. Government indemnifications under Public Law 85-804, 10 U.S.C. 3861, the Commercial Space Launch Act or the Price-Anderson Act, qualification of our products and services by the Department of Homeland Security under the SAFETY Act provisions of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, contractual provisions or otherwise.

We seek to obtain insurance coverage from established and reputable insurance carriers to the extent available in order to cover these risks and liabilities. However, the amount of insurance coverage that we maintain or that is available to purchase in the market may not be adequate to cover all claims or liabilities and we may self-insure certain types of risk. Insurance coverage is subject to the terms and conditions of the insurance contract and is further subject to any sublimits, exclusions, restrictions, or defenses, including standard exclusions for acts of war. Existing coverage is renewed annually and may be canceled pursuant to the terms of the policies while we remain exposed to the risk and it is not possible to obtain insurance to protect against all operational risks, natural hazards and liabilities. For example, we are limited in the amount of insurance we

20

Table of Contents

can obtain to cover unusually hazardous risks or certain natural hazards such as earthquakes, fires or extreme weather conditions, some of which may be exacerbated by climate change. We have significant operations in geographic areas prone to these risks, such as in California, Florida and Texas, and certain of our properties have suffered damage from natural disasters in the past and may again in the future. We could incur significant costs to improve the climate resiliency of our infrastructure and supply chain and otherwise prepare for, respond to, and mitigate the effects of climate change. In addition, under certain classified fixed-price development and production contracts, we are unable to insure risk of loss to government property because of the classified nature of the contracts and the inability to disclose classified information necessary for underwriting and claims to commercial insurers. Even if insurance coverage is available, we may not be able to obtain it in an amount, at a price or on terms acceptable to us. Some insurance providers may be unable or unwilling to provide us insurance given the nature of our business or products. Additionally, disputes with insurance carriers over coverage terms or the insolvency of one or more of our insurance carriers may significantly affect the amount or timing of our cash flows.

Substantial costs resulting from an accident, failure of or defect in our products or services, natural catastrophe or other incident, or liability arising from our products and services in excess of any legal protection, indemnity, and our insurance coverage (or for which indemnity or insurance is not available or not obtained) could adversely impact our financial condition and operating results. Any accident, failure of, or defect in our products or services, even if fully indemnified or insured, could negatively affect our reputation among our customers and the public and make it more difficult for us to compete effectively. It also could affect the cost and availability of adequate insurance in the future.

Environmental regulations, including in relation to climate change, could adversely affect our future earnings as well as the affordability of our products and services.

We are subject to federal, state, local and foreign requirements for the protection of the environment, including those for discharge of hazardous materials and remediation of contaminated sites. Due in part to the complexity and pervasiveness of these requirements, we are a party to or have property subject to various lawsuits, proceedings, and remediation obligations. These types of matters could result in fines, penalties, cost reimbursements or contributions, compensatory or treble damages or non-monetary sanctions or relief. We have incurred and will continue to incur liabilities for environmental remediation at some of our current and former facilities and at third-party-owned sites where we have been designated a potentially responsible party as a result of our historical activities and those of our predecessor companies. Environmental remediation activities usually span many years, and the extent of financial exposure can be difficult to estimate. Among the variables management must assess in evaluating costs associated with these cases and remediation sites are the status of site assessment, extent of the contamination, impacts on natural resources, changing cost estimates, evolution of technologies used to remediate the site, continually evolving environmental standards, availability of insurance coverage and indemnification under existing agreements and cost allowability issues, including varying efforts by the U.S. Government to limit allowability of our costs in resolving liability at third-party-owned sites. Our environmental remediation related liabilities also could increase significantly because of acquisitions, stricter remediation standards for existing or newly regulated substances, changes in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws and regulations, or the discovery of previously unknown or more extensive contamination. For information regarding these matters, including current estimates of the amounts that we believe are required for environmental remediation to the extent probable and estimable, see “Critical Accounting Policies – Environmental Matters” in the MD&A and “Note 14 – Legal Proceedings, Commitments and Contingencies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

We manage and have managed various U.S. Government-owned facilities on behalf of the U.S. Government. At such facilities, environmental compliance and remediation costs historically have been the responsibility of the U.S. Government. We have relied, and continue to rely with respect to past practices, on U.S. Government funding to pay at least a portion if not all of such costs, notwithstanding efforts by some U.S. Government representatives to limit the U.S. Government’s responsibility. Although the U.S. Government remains responsible for capital and operating costs associated with environmental compliance, responsibility for fines and penalties associated with environmental noncompliance typically is borne by either the U.S. Government or the contractor, depending on the contract and the relevant facts. Some environmental laws include criminal provisions. A conviction under environmental law could affect our ability to be awarded future or perform under existing U.S. Government contracts.

The increasing global regulatory focus on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and their potential impacts relating to climate change could result in laws, regulations or policies that significantly increase our direct and indirect operational and compliance burdens, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. These laws, regulations or policies could take many forms, including carbon taxes, cap and trade regimes, increased efficiency standards, GHG reduction commitments, incentives or mandates for particular types of energy, disclosure requirements or changes in procurement laws. Changes in government procurement laws that mandate or take into account climate change considerations, such as the contractor’s GHG emissions, GHG emission reduction targets, lower emission products or other climate risks, in evaluating

21

Table of Contents

bids could result in costly changes to our operations or affect our competitiveness on future bids, or our ability to bid at all. In addition to incurring direct costs to implement any climate-change related laws, regulations or policies, we may see indirect costs rise, such as increased energy or material costs, as a result of policies affecting other sectors of the economy. Although most of these increased costs likely would be recoverable through pricing, to the extent that the increase in our costs as a result of these policies are greater than our competitors, we may be less competitive on future bids or the total increased cost in our industry’s products and services could result in lower demand from our customers. We monitor developments in climate change-related laws, regulations and policies for their potential effect on us, however, we currently are not able to accurately predict the materiality of any potential costs associated with such developments. In addition, climate change-related litigation and investigations have increased in recent years and any claims or investigations against us could be costly to defend and our business could be adversely affected by the outcome.

We are involved in a number of legal proceedings. We cannot predict the outcome of litigation and other contingencies with certainty.

Our business may be adversely affected by the outcome of legal proceedings and other contingencies that cannot be predicted with certainty. As required by U.S. GAAP, we estimate loss contingencies and establish reserves based on our assessment of contingencies where liability is deemed probable and reasonably estimable considering the facts and circumstances known to us at a particular point in time. Subsequent developments in legal proceedings may affect our assessment and estimates of the loss contingency recorded as a liability or as a reserve against assets in our financial statements. For a description of our current legal proceedings, see Item 3 – Legal Proceedings, “Critical Accounting Policies - Environmental Matters” in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and “Note 14 – Legal Proceedings, Commitments and Contingencies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Stock

There can be no assurance that we will continue to increase our dividend or to repurchase shares of our common stock.

Cash dividend payments and share repurchases are subject to limitations under applicable laws and the discretion of our Board of Directors and are determined after considering then-existing conditions, including earnings, other operating results and capital requirements and cash deployment alternatives. Our payment of dividends and share repurchases could vary from historical practices or our stated expectations. Decreases in asset values or increases in liabilities, including liabilities associated with employee benefit plans and assets and liabilities associated with taxes, can reduce net earnings and stockholders’ equity. Under certain circumstances, a deficit in stockholders’ equity could limit our ability to pay dividends and make share repurchases under Maryland state law in the future. In addition, the timing and amount of share repurchases under Board of Directors approved share repurchase plans may differ from stated expectations and is within the discretion of management and will depend on many factors, including our ability to generate sufficient cash flows from operations in the future or to borrow money from available financing sources, our results of operations, capital requirements and applicable law.

ITEM 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

ITEM 1C. Cybersecurity

Risk Management and Strategy

We believe cybersecurity is critical to advancing our 21st Century Security vision and enabling our digital transformation efforts. As an aerospace and defense company, we face a multitude of cybersecurity threats that range from attacks common to most industries, such as ransomware and denial-of-service, to attacks from more advanced and persistent, highly organized adversaries, including nation state actors, some of which target the defense industrial base and other critical infrastructure sectors. Our customers, suppliers, subcontractors and joint venture partners face similar cybersecurity threats, and a cybersecurity incident impacting us or any of these entities could materially adversely affect our operations, performance and results of operations. These cybersecurity threats and related risks make it imperative that we strive to be a leader in the information security field, and we expend considerable resources on cybersecurity.

Our corporate information security organization has implemented a governance structure and processes to assess, identify, manage and report cybersecurity risks. We also have a corporate-wide counterintelligence and insider threat detection program to proactively identify external and internal threats and mitigate those threats in a timely manner. As a defense contractor, we must comply with extensive regulations, including requirements imposed by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) related to adequately safeguarding controlled unclassified information (CUI) and reporting cybersecurity incidents to the DoD. We have implemented cybersecurity policies and frameworks based on industry and governmental

22

Table of Contents

standards to align closely with DoD requirements, instructions and guidance. Moreover, we continue to work with the DoD on assessing cybersecurity risk and on policies and practices aimed at mitigating these risks. For example, we have worked in collaboration with the other members of the defense industrial base to support DoD’s development of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) program, DoD’s program to ensure members of the defense industrial base meet cybersecurity requirements for handling CUI and federal contract information. We believe we are well positioned to meet the requirements of the CMMC and are preparing for certification. In addition to following DoD guidance and implementing pre-existing third party frameworks, we have developed our own practices and frameworks, which we believe enhance our ability to identify and manage cybersecurity risks. For example, we use a proactive risk management strategy that we developed and implemented called the Intelligence Driven Defense® model that seeks to identify and prevent cybersecurity incidents by understanding the nature of adversaries and using this information to minimize the impact of an attack.

Third parties also play a role in our cybersecurity. We engage third-party services to conduct evaluations of our security controls, whether through penetration testing, independent audits or consulting on best practices to address new challenges. These evaluations include testing both the design and operational effectiveness of security controls. We also share and receive threat intelligence with our defense industrial base peers, government agencies, information sharing and analysis centers and cybersecurity associations.

We rely heavily on our supply chain to deliver our products and services to our customers, and a cybersecurity incident at a supplier, subcontractor, joint venture partner, or service provider could materially adversely impact us. We assess third party cybersecurity controls through a cybersecurity questionnaire and include security and privacy addendums to our contracts where applicable. We also contractually flow cybersecurity regulatory requirements to our subcontractors as required by the DFARS and other government agency specific requirements. These contractual flow downs include the requirement that our subcontractors implement certain security controls, and that our subcontractors self-report the status of their implementation of these controls to the U.S. Government. These government contracting regulations may create challenges for our supply chain and increase costs. We also require that our subcontractors report cybersecurity incidents to us so that we can assess the impact of the incident on us. For select suppliers, we engage third-party cybersecurity monitoring and alerting services, and seek to work directly with those suppliers to address potential deficiencies identified. We also make available cybersecurity education and awareness materials and briefings to our suppliers.

Governance

The Board of Directors oversees management’s processes for identifying and mitigating risks, including cybersecurity risks, to help align our risk exposure with our strategic objectives. Senior leadership, including our Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), regularly briefs the Board of Directors on our cybersecurity and information security posture and the Board of Directors is apprised of cybersecurity incidents deemed to have a moderate or higher business impact, even if immaterial to us. The Classified Business and Security Committee of the Board of Directors is briefed by senior leadership, as appropriate, on the cybersecurity of classified programs and the security of our classified business supply chain. Other than oversight of classified business cybersecurity, the full Board retains oversight of cybersecurity because of its importance to Lockheed Martin and the heightened risk in the aerospace and defense industry. In the event of an incident, we intend to follow our detailed incident response playbook, which outlines the steps to be followed from incident detection to mitigation, recovery and notification, including notifying functional areas (e.g., legal), as well as senior leadership, the Board, and regulators, as appropriate.

Our corporate information security organization, led by our CISO, is responsible for our overall information security strategy, policy, security engineering, operations and cyber threat detection and response.The current CISO has extensive information technology and program management experience, and has served many years in our corporate information security organization. The corporate information security organization manages and continually enhances a robust enterprise security structure with the ultimate goal of preventing cybersecurity incidents to the extent feasible, while simultaneously increasing our system resilience in an effort to minimize the business impact should an incident occur. Central to this organization is our computer incident response team (CIRT), which is responsible for the protection, detection and response capabilities used in the defense of Lockheed Martin’s data and enterprise computing networks. Employees outside of our corporate information security organization also have a role in our cybersecurity defenses and they are immersed in a corporate culture supportive of security, which we believe improves our cybersecurity.

Assessing, identifying and managing cybersecurity related risks are integrated into our overall enterprise risk management (ERM) process. Cybersecurity related risks are included in the risk universe that the ERM function evaluates to assess top risks to the enterprise on an annual basis. To the extent the ERM process identifies a heightened cybersecurity related risk, risk owners are assigned to develop risk mitigation plans, which are then tracked to completion. The ERM process’s annual risk assessment and relevant mitigations are presented to the Board of Directors.

Notwithstanding the extensive approach we take to cybersecurity, we may not be successful in preventing or mitigating a cybersecurity incident that could have a material adverse effect on us. While Lockheed Martin maintains cybersecurity

23

Table of Contents

insurance, the costs related to cybersecurity threats or disruptions may not be fully insured. See Item 1A. “Risk Factors” for a discussion of cybersecurity risks.

ITEM 2.Properties

At December 31, 2024, we owned or leased building space (including offices, manufacturing plants, warehouses, service centers, laboratories and other facilities) at 356 locations primarily in the U.S. Additionally, we manage or occupy 9 government-owned facilities under lease and other arrangements. At December 31, 2024, we had significant operations in the following locations:

•Aeronautics - Palmdale, California; Marietta, Georgia; Greenville, South Carolina; and Fort Worth, Texas.

•Missiles and Fire Control - Camden, Arkansas; Ocala and Orlando, Florida; Lexington, Kentucky; and Grand Prairie, Texas

•Rotary and Mission Systems - Stratford, Connecticut; Orlando, Florida; Moorestown/Mt. Laurel, New Jersey; Owego and Syracuse, New York; Manassas, Virginia; and Mielec, Poland.

•Space - Huntsville, Alabama; Sunnyvale, California; Denver, Colorado; Cape Canaveral, Florida; and Valley Forge, Pennsylvania.

•Corporate activities - Bethesda, Maryland.

The following is a summary of our square feet of floor space owned, leased, or utilized by business segment at December 31, 2024 (in millions):

Owned Leased Government-Owned Total

Corporate activities 2.5 0.9 — 3.4

We believe our facilities are in good condition and adequate for their current use. We may add, improve, replace, or reduce facilities as considered appropriate to meet the needs of our operations.

ITEM 3.Legal Proceedings

We are a party to litigation and other proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of our business, including matters arising under provisions relating to the protection of the environment, and are subject to contingencies related to certain businesses we previously owned. These types of matters could result in fines, penalties, cost reimbursements or contributions, compensatory or treble damages or non-monetary sanctions or relief. We believe the probability is remote that the outcome of each of these matters will have a material adverse effect on the corporation as a whole, notwithstanding that the unfavorable resolution of any matter may have a material effect on our net earnings and cash flows in any particular interim reporting period. We cannot predict the outcome of legal or other proceedings with certainty.

We are subject to federal, state, local and foreign requirements for the protection of the environment, including those for discharge of hazardous materials and remediation of contaminated sites. Due in part to the complexity and pervasiveness of these requirements, we are a party to or have property subject to various lawsuits, proceedings and remediation obligations. The extent of our financial exposure cannot in all cases be reasonably estimated at this time.

For information regarding the matters discussed above, including current estimates of the amounts that we believe are required for remediation or clean-up to the extent estimable, see “Critical Accounting Policies - Environmental Matters” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Note 14 – Legal Proceedings, Commitments and Contingencies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, which are incorporated herein by reference.

ITEM 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

24

Table of Contents

Information about our Executive Officers

Our executive officers as of January 28, 2025 are listed below, with their ages on that date, positions and offices currently held, and principal occupation and business experience during at least the last five years. Effective February 21, 2024, the titles of our business segment executive officers were changed from Executive Vice President to President, with no changes to their duties or responsibilities. There are no family relationships among any of our executive officers and directors. All executive officers serve at the discretion of the Board of Directors.

Timothy S. Cahill (age 59), President – Missiles and Fire Control

Mr. Cahill has served as President for the Missiles and Fire Control (MFC) business segment since November 2022. Mr. Cahill previously served as Senior Vice President Global Business Development & Strategy (GBD&S) from March 2021 to October 2022. Prior to that, Mr. Cahill served as Senior Vice President Lockheed Martin International from October 2019 to March 2021.

Stephanie C. Hill (age 60), President – Rotary and Mission Systems

Ms. Hill has served as President for the Rotary and Mission Systems (RMS) business segment since June 2020. She previously served as Senior Vice President, Enterprise Business Transformation from June 2019 to June 2020.

Robert M. Lightfoot, Jr. (age 61), President – Space

Mr. Lightfoot has served as President for the Space business segment since January 2022. He previously served as Vice President, Operations for the Space business segment from June 2021 to December 2021. Prior to that, he served as Vice President, Strategy and Business Development for Space from May 2019 to June 2021.

Jesus Malave (age 56), Chief Financial Officer

Mr. Malave has served as Chief Financial Officer since January 2022. Prior to joining Lockheed Martin Corporation in 2022, Mr. Malave served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of L3Harris Technologies, Inc. (L3Harris) from June 2019 to January 2022.

Kevin J. O’Connor (age 57), Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

Mr. O’Connor has served as Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary since January 2025. Prior to joining Lockheed Martin Corporation he served as the Senior Vice President and Chief Legal Officer of Carrier Corporation from January 2020 until January 2025, prior to which he served as Chief Legal Officer of Point72 Asset Management from June 2015 until January 2020.

H. Edward Paul, III (age 49), Vice President and Controller

Mr. Paul has served as Vice President and Controller since June 2022. Previously, he served as Vice President, Accounting from March 2015 to June 2022.

Maria A. Ricciardone (age 49), Vice President, Treasurer and Investor Relations

Ms. Ricciardone has served as Vice President, Treasurer and Investor Relations since January 2024. She previously served as Vice President, Investor Relations from October 2022 to December 2023. Prior to joining Lockheed Martin Corporation in October 2022, she served as Vice President, Finance – FP&A and Global Components of Arrow Electronics from June 2019 to October 2022. Prior to that, she served as Treasurer and Vice President, Strategy and Investor Relations for Hubbell Incorporated from January 2016 to June 2019.

25

Table of Contents

Frank A. St. John (age 58), Chief Operating Officer

Mr. St. John has served as Chief Operating Officer since June 2020. He previously served as Executive Vice President for RMS from August 2019 to June 2020.

James D. Taiclet (age 64), Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Mr. Taiclet has served as Chairman since March 2021 and as President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Lockheed Martin Corporation since June 2020. He has served on the Lockheed Martin Corporation Board of Directors since January 2018. Previously, he was Chairman, President and CEO of American Tower Corporation from February 2004 to March 2020; and Executive Chairman from March 2020 to May 2020.

Gregory M. Ulmer (age 60), President – Aeronautics

Mr. Ulmer has served as President for the Aeronautics business segment since February 2021. He previously served as Vice President and General Manager, F-35 Lightning II Program from March 2018 to January 2021.

26

Table of Contents

PART II

ITEM 5.Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

At January 23, 2025, we had 21,751 holders of record of our common stock, par value $1 per share. Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol LMT.

Stockholder Return Performance Graph

The following graph compares the total return on a cumulative basis through December 31, 2024, assuming reinvestment of dividends, of $100 invested in Lockheed Martin common stock as of market close on December 31, 2019 to the Standard and Poor’s (S&P) 500 Index and the S&P Aerospace & Defense Index.

The S&P Aerospace & Defense Index comprises Axon Enterprise, Inc., General Dynamics Corporation, General Electric Company, Howmet Aerospace Inc., Huntington Ingalls Industries, L3Harris Technologies, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corporation, Northrop Grumman Corporation, RTX Corporation, Textron Inc., The Boeing Company and Transdigm Group Inc. The stockholder return performance indicated on the graph is not a guarantee of future performance.

This graph is not deemed to be “filed” with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or subject to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act), and should not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any of our prior or subsequent filings under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act.

27

Table of Contents

Purchases of Equity Securities

There were no sales of unregistered equity securities during the quarter ended December 31, 2024.

The following table provides information about our repurchases of our common stock that is registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the quarter ended December 31, 2024.

(in millions)

(a)We close our books and records on the last Sunday of each month to align our financial closing with our business processes, except for the month of December, as our fiscal year ends on December 31. As a result, our fiscal months often differ from the calendar months. For example, November 25, 2024 was the first day of our December 2024 fiscal month.

(b)In 2010, our Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program pursuant to which we are authorized to repurchase our common stock in privately negotiated transactions or in the open market at prices per share not exceeding the then-current market prices. From time to time, our Board of Directors authorizes increases to our share repurchase program. In October 2024, the Board of Directors authorized an increase to the program by $3.0 billion. The total remaining authorization for future common share repurchases under our share repurchase program was $9.3 billion as of December 31, 2024. Under the program, management has discretion to determine the dollar amount of shares to be repurchased and the timing of any repurchases in compliance with applicable law and regulation. This includes purchases pursuant to Rule 10b5-1 plans, including accelerated share repurchases. The program does not have an expiration date.

(c)During the fourth quarter of 2024, the total number of shares purchased included 9,609 shares that were transferred to us by employees in satisfaction of tax withholding obligations associated with the vesting of restricted stock units. These purchases were made pursuant to a separate authorization by our Board of Directors and are not included within the share repurchase program described above.

ITEM 6. [Reserved]

28

Table of Contents

ITEM 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A) is intended to help the reader understand our results of operations and financial condition. The MD&A is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in Item 8 - Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

The MD&A generally discusses 2024 and 2023 items and year-to-year comparisons between 2024 and 2023. Discussions of 2022 items and year-to-year comparisons between 2023 and 2022 that are not included in this Form 10-K can be found in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results or Operations” in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023 filed with the SEC on January 23, 2024.

Business Overview

We are a global aerospace and defense company principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. We also provide a broad range of management, engineering, technical, scientific, logistics, system integration and cybersecurity services. Our main areas of focus are in defense, space, intelligence, homeland security and information technology, including cybersecurity. We serve both U.S. and international customers with products and services that have defense, civil and commercial applications, with our principal customers being agencies of the U.S. Government. In 2024, 73% of our $71.0 billion in net sales were from the U.S. Government, either as a prime contractor or as a subcontractor (including 65% from the Department of Defense (DoD)), 26% were from international customers (including foreign military sales (FMS) contracted through the U.S. Government) and 1% were from U.S. commercial and other customers.

We operate in four business segments: Aeronautics, Missiles and Fire Control (MFC), Rotary and Mission Systems (RMS) and Space. We organize our business segments based on the nature of the products and services offered.

Our 21st Century Security® vision is to accelerate the adoption of advanced networking and other leading-edge technologies into the American defense enterprise, while enhancing the performance and value of our platforms and products for our customers. The aim of 21st Century Security is to integrate and continuously upgrade new and existing systems across all domains with advanced, open-architecture networking and operational technologies that make defense forces more agile, adaptive and unpredictable, enabling overmatch and strengthening deterrence today and into the future.

21st Century Security guides our strategy and investments. As our growth pillars continue to evolve, we are focusing on advancing all-domain mission solutions through investments in digital technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML), Autonomy and Crewed/Uncrewed Teaming, Generative Design and other technologies and capabilities enabling Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control (CJADC2). Innovations in these areas will expand capability, improve interoperability, increase demand for our multi-domain solutions and drive efficient conversion of backlog into growth across our portfolio. We have well established programs across our business segments that continue to experience growth, including F-35 sustainment activity (Aeronautics); increased Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) production rates and increased demand for High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS®) and Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (GMLRS) (Missiles and Fire Control); radar surveillance systems and CH-53K King Stallion heavy lift helicopter (Rotary and Mission Systems); and the modernization of and enhancements to the Trident II D5 Fleet Ballistic Missile (FBM) (Space). Additionally, our teams continue to transform our products and rapidly innovate for the future, developing 6th generation air dominance technologies within Skunk Works®, demonstrating autonomous capabilities with the X-62A (F-16) and optionally piloted BLACK HAWK®, creating new Joint All-Domain Operating systems with Defense of Guam and AIR 6500 in Australia, establishing small-to-medium satellite capabilities to support proliferated space constellations and advancing hypersonic capabilities. Finally, we are always in pursuit of new program awards to develop future platforms that enable us to continue to strengthen our national defense and advance deterrence and global security.

Keys to enabling success of our strategy include developing and investing in differentiating technologies, forging strategic partnerships, including with commercial companies, executing on our multi-year business transformation initiative to enhance our digital infrastructure and increase efficiencies and collaboration throughout our business and maintaining fiscal discipline. Underpinning our ability to execute our strategy is our talent and culture. We invest substantially in our people to ensure that our workforce has the technical skills necessary to succeed, and we expect to continue to invest internally in innovative technologies that address rapidly evolving mission requirements for our customers. We also will continue to evaluate our portfolio and will make strategic acquisitions or divestitures, as appropriate, while deepening our connection to commercial industry through cooperative partnerships, joint ventures and equity investments.

29

Table of Contents

Portfolio Shaping Activities

We continuously strive to strengthen our portfolio of products and services to meet the current and future needs of our customers. We accomplish this in part by our independent research and development activities and through acquisition, divestiture and internal realignment activities.

We selectively pursue the acquisition of businesses, investments and ventures at attractive valuations that will expand or complement our current portfolio and allow access to new customers or technologies. We also may explore the divestiture of businesses, investments or ventures that no longer meet our needs or strategy or that could perform better outside of our organization or with a different owner. In pursuing our business strategy, we routinely conduct discussions, evaluate targets and enter into agreements regarding possible acquisitions, divestitures, joint ventures and equity investments.

On September 9, 2024, we completed the sale of our Commercial Engine Solutions (CES) business, which was part of our Aeronautics business segment. We received $170 million in cash from the sale. Gains recognized from the sale in 2024 were not significant. The final gain is subject to certain post-closing adjustments, including final working capital, indemnification, and tax adjustments, which we expect to complete in 2025. This sale did not represent a strategic shift and the impacts to our consolidated results of operation, financial position, and cash were not significant. Accordingly, the operating results and cash flows for the CES business up to the divestiture date have not been reclassified to discontinued operations.

On October 30, 2024, we closed our acquisition of Terran Orbital Corporation (Terran Orbital) for a purchase consideration of $314 million, which will be included in our Space business segment. Terran Orbital’s product and service offerings include satellite design, production, launch planning, mission operations, and on-orbit support for the aerospace and defense industries. We believe this acquisition will enable us to broaden our capabilities and offerings, provide additional innovative solutions to meet our customers’ emerging requirements, and provide expanded opportunities for our combined employees. The financial results of Terran Orbital have been included within our operating results in the period post-acquisition. See Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements for further information regarding the acquisition of Terran Orbital.

U.S. Budget Environment

With approximately three quarters of our sales from the U.S. Government, U.S. Government spending levels, particularly defense spending, and timely funding thereof can affect our financial performance over the short and long term.

On March 22, 2024, the President signed into law the second Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Consolidated Appropriations package, which includes the DoD funding. This legislation reflects the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (FRA) spending limit of $886 billion for National Defense, of which $842 billion was for the DoD base budget.

The President’s FY 2025 budget request was submitted to Congress on March 11, 2024, initiating the FY 2025 defense authorization and appropriations legislative process. The request included $895 billion for National Defense, of which $850 billion is for the DoD base budget, in keeping with the limit established by the FRA. While compression on overall requirements driven by the FRA limit is evident, the Office of the Secretary of Defense has stated the FY 2025 budget proposal meets their objectives of keeping National Defense Strategy priorities on track.

On April 24, 2024, the President signed a bill providing a total of $95 billion in additional supplemental funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, including funding for the restock of U.S. munitions capacity. Supplemental funding legislation is not subject to the FRA limits.

The House and Senate continue the legislative process on the FY 2025 budget. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025, signed by the President on December 24, 2024, is consistent with the FY 2025 President’s Budget Request (PBR) and Congressionally mandated budget caps established by the FRA with a topline of $849.8 billion. The House Appropriations Committee also marked its bill at this same level. The Senate Appropriations Committee, however, did not adhere to the FRA spending caps and marked budgets above the PBR, providing between a $21 billion and $25 billion increase over the PBR level. Regardless of toplines, all four Committees support additional funding for several of our programs, spread across our four business areas.

Congress still needs to approve or revise the President’s FY 2025 budget proposal through enactment of appropriations bills and other policy legislation, which would then require final approval from the President in order for the FY 2025 budget process to conclude. A second Continuing Resolution (CR) for FY 2025 passed the House and Senate on December 20, 2024, and was signed by the President on December 21, 2024. The bill funds U.S. Government operations through March 14, 2025. In addition to the Continuing Resolution, the President also signed the Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act on December 21, 2024, which includes more than $100 billion in supplemental funding. Of note, the final version of the bill did

30

Table of Contents

not address the debt ceiling, which is set to expire mid-January 2025 and is expected to cause challenges at the start of the 119th Congressional negotiations. Once the debt ceiling is reached, Treasury may have to use extraordinary measures to prevent default. Treasury’s available cash and any extraordinary measures taken should delay the risk of default for at least several months after the end of the first quarter of 2025. In the upcoming months, the new Congress will return to the task of funding the U.S. Government for the balance of FY 2025. Significant differences that must be resolved include the different allocations as noted above and policy matters that arose during consideration of the CR and the underlying bills.

We anticipate the federal budget will continue to be subject to debate and compromise shaped by, among other things, the new Administration and Congress, the global security environment, inflationary pressures, and macroeconomic conditions. The result may be shifting funding priorities, which could have material impacts on defense spending broadly and our programs.

Geopolitical and Economic Environment

We operate in a complex and evolving global security environment and our business is affected by geopolitical and security issues. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, conflicts in the Middle East and heightened tension in the Pacific region have elevated global security concerns resulting in increased interest for our products and services as countries seek to improve their security posture. In this context, the U.S. Government, our largest customer, continues to align its budget with the defense priorities set forth in the 2022 National Defense Strategy. In addition, security assistance provided by the U.S. Government and its allies to Ukraine has increased U.S. Government and allied demand to replenish U.S. stockpiles, resulting in additional and potential future orders, including for the ramp-up in production capacity for certain products. We continue to expect additional orders over the next several years attributable to the global threat environment. We operate primarily in a long-cycle business and the U.S. Government has been focused on increasing industry capacity to meet demand. We continue to work with the U.S. Government and our supply chain to evaluate increases in capacity at our operations to anticipate potential demand and enable us to deliver critical capabilities.

Our business and financial performance is also affected by general economic conditions. We continue to experience supply chain challenges, including supplier shortages and performance issues. These issues have delayed certain customer deliveries, have been a limiting factor on our ability to ramp up production in response to customer demand for certain products and have caused out-of-sequence manufacturing, which increases costs and decreases operational efficiency. In addition, elevated levels of inflation and macroeconomic conditions present risks for us, our suppliers and the stability of the broader defense industrial base. Certain costs, including rising labor rates and supplier costs, have increased as a result of inflation, and have adversely affected our margins on certain programs. In addition, some suppliers are reducing the duration of pricing validity of their proposals to us or seeking to reopen pricing on existing agreements, which is operationally challenging and increases the risk of cost volatility. We continue to work to mitigate challenges caused by the supply chain or current macroeconomic environment on our business, including by supporting small business and at-risk suppliers, deploying resources to work with our supply chain, securing materials and support by executing long-term contracts, enforcing existing contract terms, identifying alternative sources, collaborating with our customers to address industry-wide challenges, and optimizing our supply chain organization through digital transformation and workforce development. If we experience significant supply chain issues or high rates of inflation, and are unable to successfully mitigate the impact, our future profits, margins and cash flows, particularly for existing fixed-price contracts, may be adversely affected. Inflation and higher interest rates can also constrain the overall purchasing power of our customers for our products and services potentially impacting future orders, especially in a budget constrained environment. We remain committed to our ongoing efforts to increase the efficiency of our operations and improve the cost competitiveness and affordability of our products and services, which may, in part, offset cost increases from inflation.

International Business

A key component of our strategic plan is to grow our international sales. To accomplish this growth, we continue to focus on strengthening our relationships internationally through partnerships and joint technology efforts. Our international business is conducted either by FMS contracted through the U.S. Government or by direct commercial sales (DCS) to international customers. In 2024, approximately 73% of our sales to international customers were FMS and about 27% were DCS. Additionally, in 2024, substantially all of our sales from international customers were in our Aeronautics, MFC and RMS business segments. Space’s sales from international customers were not material in 2024. See Item 1A - Risk Factors for a discussion of risks related to international sales.

In 2024, international customers accounted for 32% of Aeronautics’ net sales. There continues to be strong international interest in the F-35 program, which includes commitments from the U.S. Government and seven international partner countries and twelve FMS customers, as well as expressions of interest from other countries. The U.S. Government and the partner countries continue to work together on the design, testing, production and sustainment of the F-35 program. Other areas of

31

Table of Contents

international expansion at our Aeronautics business segment include the F-16 and C-130J programs, which continue to draw interest from international customers for new aircraft.

In 2024, international customers accounted for 29% of MFC’s net sales. Our MFC business segment continues to generate significant international interest, most notably in the air and missile defense product line, which produces the PAC-3 and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems. Seventeen nations have chosen PAC-3 Cost Reduction Initiative (CRI) and PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) to provide missile defense capabilities. Additionally, we continue to see international demand for our tactical and strike missile products, where we received orders from Poland for precision fire systems and for Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM).

In 2024, international customers accounted for 32% of RMS’ net sales. Our RMS business segment continues to experience international interest in the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (Aegis) for which we perform activities in the development, production, modernization, ship integration, test and lifetime support for ships of international customers such as Japan, Spain, the Republic of Korea and Australia. We have ongoing combat systems programs associated with different classes of surface combatant ships for customers in Canada, Chile and New Zealand. Our Multi-Mission Surface Combatant (MMSC) program will provide surface combatant ships for international customers, such as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, designed to operate in shallow waters and the open ocean. In our training and logistics solutions portfolio, we have active programs and pursuits in the United Kingdom, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Canada, Singapore, Australia, Germany and France. We have active development, production and sustainment support of the S-70 Black Hawk and MH-60 Seahawk helicopters to international customers, including India, Philippines, Australia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Greece. Commercial aircraft are sold to international customers to support search and rescue missions as well as VIP and offshore oil and gas transportation.

Status of the F-35 Program

The F-35 program primarily consists of production contracts, sustainment activities, and new development efforts. Production of the aircraft is expected to continue for many years given the U.S. Government’s objective of procuring 2,456 aircraft for the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Navy. We also have commitments from seven international partner countries and twelve FMS customers. We continue to see strong international demand for the F-35, with the Czech Republic signing an LOA in January 2024 to procure 24 F-35s, Singapore announcing in February 2024 its intent to purchase eight additional F-35s, and Greece signing an LOA in July 2024 to procure 20 F-35s. In November 2024, Romania signed an LOA to procure 32 aircraft, becoming the 20th nation to join the F-35 program. We expect international interest to continue to expand in the coming years.

From program inception through December 31, 2024, we have delivered 1,102 production F-35 aircraft, including 797 F-35A variants, 203 F-35B variants and 102 F-35C variants, and our backlog as of that date was 408 aircraft, demonstrating the F-35 program’s continued progress and longevity. We resumed F-35 deliveries in the third quarter of 2024, after delivering none in the first half of the year, and delivered 106 Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3) configured aircraft and four TR-2 configured aircraft in 2024. We continue to advance TR-3 and Block 4 capabilities to support our customers’ mission requirements.

In December 2024, Lockheed Martin and the Joint Program Office (JPO) reached an agreement for an undefinitized contract action for Lot 18 F-35 Air Vehicle Production Contract for 145 aircraft. The scope includes aircraft for the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marines and the International Partners and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers, in addition to the required infrastructure for the international Final Assembly and Checkout Facilities (FACOs) and other equipment. While we continue to engage with the U.S. Government to definitize the contract, this agreement allowed us to recognize approximately $700 million of sales and associated operating profit deferred from the third quarter of 2024 into the fourth quarter of 2024. We were also able to invoice and collect cash of approximately $1.3 billion in the fourth quarter for costs incurred. Lot 19 was negotiated concurrently with Lot 18, and both Lots are expected to be fully awarded in 2025.

The F-35 program is significant and complex and we and our customers continually review aircraft performance, program and delivery schedule, cost and supply chain issues, and requirements as part of our internal program management efforts and the DoD, Congressional and international countries’ oversight and budgeting processes. Areas of particular focus currently include Lockheed Martin’s and our suppliers’ performance, software maturation related to TR-3 capability and software development more generally, flight test execution, cost of life cycle operations, sustainment, inflation-related cost and supply chain-related cost and schedule pressures, and efforts to increase affordability.

Backlog

At December 31, 2024, our backlog was $176.0 billion compared with $160.6 billion at December 31, 2023. Backlog is converted into sales in future periods as work is performed or deliveries are made. We expect to recognize approximately 35%

32

Table of Contents

of our backlog over the next 12 months and approximately 60% over the next 24 months as revenue, with the remainder recognized thereafter.

Our backlog includes both funded (firm orders for our products and services for which funding has been both authorized and appropriated by the customer) and unfunded (firm orders for which funding has not been appropriated) amounts. We do not include unexercised options or potential orders under indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) agreements in our backlog. If any of our contracts with firm orders were to be terminated, our backlog would be reduced by the expected value of the unfilled orders of such contracts. Funded backlog was $107.8 billion at December 31, 2024, as compared to $107.4 billion at December 31, 2023. For backlog related to each of our business segments, see below.

Consolidated Results of Operations

Our operating cycle is primarily long-term and involves many types of contracts for the design, development and manufacture of products and related activities with varying delivery schedules. Consequently, the results of operations of a particular year, or year-to-year comparisons of sales and profits, may not be indicative of future operating results. The following discussions of comparative results should be reviewed in this context. All per share amounts cited in these discussions are presented on a “per diluted share” basis, unless otherwise noted. Our consolidated results of operations were as follows (in millions, except per share data):

Non-service FAS pension income (expense) 62 443 (971)

Other non-operating income (expense), net 181 64 (74)

Certain amounts reported in other income, net, including our share of earnings or losses from equity method investees, are included in the operating profit of our business segments. Accordingly, such amounts are included in the discussion of our business segment results of operations.

Net Sales

We generate sales from the delivery of products and services to our customers. Our consolidated net sales were as follows (in millions):

Substantially all of our contracts are accounted for using the percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost method. Under the percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost method, we record net sales on contracts over time based upon our progress towards completion on a particular contract, as well as our estimate of the profit to be earned at completion. The following discussion of material changes in our consolidated net sales should be read in tandem with the subsequent discussion of changes in our consolidated cost of sales and our business segment results of operations because changes in our sales are typically accompanied by a corresponding change in our cost of sales due to the nature of the percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost method.

33

Table of Contents

Product Sales

Product sales increased $3.0 billion, or 5%, in 2024 as compared to 2023. The increase was primarily attributable to higher product sales of approximately $1.4 billion at MFC, $1.1 billion at RMS and $840 million at Aeronautics. Higher product sales at MFC were due to production ramp up on GMLRS, HIMARS, JASSM and LRASM programs. Higher product sales at RMS were primarily due to higher volume on radar programs, new program ramp up within the laser systems portfolio and higher production volume on CH-53K program, partially offset by lower volume on the VH-92A program. Higher product sales at Aeronautics were due to higher volume on F-35 production contracts.

Service Sales

Service sales increased $460 million, or 4%, in 2024 as compared to 2023. The increase in service sales was primarily due to higher sales of approximately $305 million at Aeronautics and $150 million at Space. Higher service sales at Aeronautics were due to higher volume on F-35 sustainment contracts. Higher service sales at Space were due to higher volume on national security space services.

Cost of Sales

Cost of sales, for both products and services, consist of materials, labor, subcontracting costs and an allocation of indirect costs (overhead and general and administrative), as well as the costs to fulfill our industrial cooperation agreements, sometimes referred to as offset agreements, required under certain contracts with international customers. For each of our contracts, we monitor the nature and amount of costs at the contract level, which form the basis for estimating our total costs to complete the contract. Our consolidated cost of sales was as follows (in millions):

Severance and other charges (87) (92) (100)

The following discussion of material changes in our consolidated cost of sales for products and services should be read in tandem with the preceding discussion of changes in our consolidated net sales and our business segment results of operations. Except for potential impacts to our programs resulting from supply chain disruptions and inflation, we have not identified any additional developing trends in cost of sales for products and services that would have a material impact on our future operations.

Product Costs

Product costs increased approximately $4.6 billion, or 9%, in 2024 as compared to 2023. The increase was primarily attributable to higher product costs of $2.5 billion at MFC, $1.2 billion at Aeronautics and $1.1 billion at RMS. Higher product costs at MFC were due to $1.4 billion in reach-forward losses on a classified program and production ramp up as described above in “Product Sales”. Higher product costs at Aeronautics were due to higher volume and production ramp up as described above in “Product Sales” and $555 million of losses recognized on a classified contract. See “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further details about classified program losses incurred at MFC and Aeronautics. Higher product costs at RMS were due to higher volume and production ramp up as described above in “Product Sales”.

Service Costs

Service costs increased approximately $190 million, or 2%, in 2024 as compared to 2023. The increase was primarily attributable to higher service costs of approximately $235 million at Aeronautics due to higher volume as described above in “Service Sales”.

34

Table of Contents

Impairment and Severance Charges

We recorded charges totaling $87 million ($69 million, or $0.29 per share, after-tax) in 2024 and $92 million ($73 million, or $0.30 per share, after-tax) in 2023. See “Note 16 – Impairment and Severance Charges” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Other Unallocated, Net

Other unallocated, net primarily includes the FAS/CAS pension operating adjustment (which represents the difference between total CAS pension cost recorded in our business segments’ results of operations and the service cost component of Financial Accounting Standards (FAS) pension income (expense)), stock-based compensation expense, changes in the fair value of assets and liabilities for deferred compensation plans, intangible asset amortization expense and other corporate costs. These items are not allocated to the business segments and, therefore, are not allocated to cost of sales for products or services. Other unallocated, net reduced cost of sales by $1.0 billion in 2024, compared to $1.2 billion in 2023. The decrease in other unallocated, net was primarily due to lower gains from the changes in the fair value of assets and liabilities related to deferred compensation plans in 2024 compared to in 2023 and fluctuations in costs associated with various corporate items, none of which were individually significant.

Other Income, Net

Other income, net in 2024 was $83 million, compared to $28 million in 2023. Other income, net primarily includes earnings generated by equity method investees, as well as gains or losses for acquisitions, divestitures, and other items, none of which are individually significant. The increase in other income, net in 2024 resulted primarily from the favorable settlement of an intellectual property related matter and higher earnings generated by equity method investees.

Interest Expense

Interest expense in 2024 was $1.0 billion, compared to $916 million in 2023. The increase in interest expense in 2024 resulted primarily from the issuance of senior unsecured notes in December 2024, January 2024 and May 2023. See “Capital Structure, Resources and Other” included within the “Liquidity and Cash Flows” discussion below and “Note 10 – Debt” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of our debt.

Non-Service FAS Pension Income

Non-service FAS pension income in 2024 was $62 million, compared to $443 million in 2023. The decrease was primarily due to a lower prior service credit amortization and a reduced asset base as detailed in “Note 11 – Postretirement Benefit Plans” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Other Non-operating Income (Expense), Net

Other non-operating income (expense), net primarily includes gains or losses related to changes in the fair value of early-stage company investments or gains or losses upon the sale of these investments. Other non-operating income, net in 2024 was $181 million, compared to $64 million in 2023. See “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Income Tax Expense

Our effective income tax rate was 14.2% for 2024 and 14.5% for 2023. The rates for all periods benefited from tax deductions for foreign derived intangible income, research and development tax credits, dividends paid to our defined contribution plans with an employee stock ownership plan feature and employee equity awards.

35

Table of Contents

Changes in U.S. (federal or state) or foreign tax laws and regulations, or their interpretation and application (including those with retroactive effect), such as the amortization for research and development expenditures, could significantly impact our provision for income taxes, the amount of taxes payable, our deferred tax asset and liability balances, and stockholders’ equity. In addition to future changes in tax laws, the amount of net deferred tax assets will change periodically based on several factors, including the measurement of our postretirement benefit plan obligations, actual cash contributions to our postretirement benefit plans and the change in the amount or reevaluation of uncertain tax positions.

Beginning in 2022, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the option to deduct research and development expenditures immediately in the year incurred and requires taxpayers to amortize such expenditures over five years for tax purposes. In 2024, research and development capitalization resulted in a cash tax liability of approximately $370 million and our net deferred tax assets increased by a similar amount. While the largest impact of this provision was to the 2022 cash tax liability, the impact will continue over the five-year amortization period, but will decrease over the period and be immaterial by 2027.

We are regularly under audit or examination by tax authorities, including foreign tax authorities (Australia, Canada, India, Italy, Japan, Poland, the United Kingdom, and other countries). The final resolution of tax audits and any related administrative reviews or litigation could result in unanticipated increases in our tax expense and changes to the timing of required tax payments, which could affect profitability and cash flows for any particular reporting period. These increases or changes could have a material impact on financial condition and results of operations in such period.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has a framework to implement a global minimum corporate tax of 15% applied on a country-by-country basis for companies with global revenues and profits above certain thresholds (referred to as Pillar 2), with certain aspects of Pillar 2 effective January 1, 2024 and other aspects effective January 1, 2025. While the United States has not enacted legislation to adopt Pillar 2 and it is uncertain if it will do so in the future, certain countries in which we operate have enacted such legislation, and other countries are in the process of doing so. We do not expect Pillar 2 to have a material impact on our effective tax rate or our financial condition and results of operation.

Net Earnings

We reported net earnings of $5.3 billion ($22.31 per share) in 2024 and $6.9 billion ($27.55 per share) in 2023. Net earnings and earnings per share in 2024 were affected by the factors mentioned above. Earnings per share also benefited from a net decrease of approximately 12.0 million weighted average common shares outstanding in 2024 compared to 2023. The reduction in weighted average common shares outstanding was a result of share repurchases, partially offset by share issuance under our stock-based awards and certain defined contribution plans.

Business Segment Results of Operations

We operate in four business segments: Aeronautics, MFC, RMS and Space. We organize our business segments based on the nature of products and services offered.

Net sales and operating profit of our business segments exclude intersegment sales, cost of sales and profit as these activities are eliminated in consolidation and thus are not included in management’s evaluation of performance of each segment. Business segment operating profit includes our share of earnings or losses from equity method investees as the operating activities of the equity method investees are closely aligned with the operations of our business segments.

Business segment operating profit excludes the FAS/CAS pension operating adjustment described below, a portion of corporate costs not considered allowable or allocable to contracts with the U.S. Government under the applicable U.S. Government Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) or portions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and other items not considered part of management’s evaluation of segment operating performance. See “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies” for a discussion related to certain factors that may impact the comparability of net sales and operating profit of our business segments.

36

Table of Contents

Sales, cost of sales and operating profit for each of our business segments were as follows (in millions):

Net sales

Cost of sales

Operating profit

Unallocated items

Intangible asset amortization expense (247) (247) (248)

Impairment and severance charges (a) (87) (92) (100)

(a)See “Consolidated Results of Operations – Severance and Other Charges” discussion above for information on charges related to certain severance and other actions across our organization.

Our business segments’ results of operations include pension expense only as calculated under CAS, which we refer to as CAS pension cost. We recover CAS pension and other postretirement benefit plan cost through the pricing of our products and services on U.S. Government contracts and, therefore, recognize CAS pension cost in each of our business segments’ net sales and cost of sales. Our consolidated financial statements must present pension and other postretirement benefit plan income calculated in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards (FAS) requirements under U.S. GAAP. The operating portion of the total FAS/CAS pension adjustment represents the difference between the service cost component of FAS pension income (expense) and total CAS pension cost. The non-service FAS pension income components are included in non-service FAS pension income in our consolidated statements of earnings. As a result, to the extent that CAS pension cost exceeds the service cost component of FAS pension income (expense), we have a favorable FAS/CAS pension operating adjustment.

37

Table of Contents

The total FAS/CAS pension adjustments, including the service and non-service cost components of FAS pension income (expense) for our qualified defined benefit pension plans, were as follows (in millions):

Total FAS income (expense) and CAS cost

FAS pension income (expense) $ 2 $ 378 $ (1,058)

Service and non-service cost reconciliation

FAS pension service cost $ (60) $ (65) $ (87)

Non-service FAS pension income (expense) 62 443 (971)

The total FAS/CAS pension adjustment in 2022 reflects a noncash, non-operating pension settlement charge of $1.5 billion ($1.2 billion, or $4.33 per share, after-tax) recognized in connection with the transfer of $4.3 billion of our gross defined benefit pension obligations and related plan assets to an insurance company in the second quarter of 2022. See “Note 11 – Postretirement Benefit Plans” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The following segment discussions include information relating to backlog for each segment. Also see “Backlog” discussion above.

Management evaluates performance on our contracts by focusing on net sales and operating profit and not by type or amount of operating expense. Consequently, our discussion of business segment performance focuses on net sales and operating profit, consistent with our approach for managing the business. This approach is consistent throughout the life cycle of our contracts, as management assesses the bidding of each contract by focusing on net sales and operating profit and monitors performance on our contracts in a similar manner through their completion.

We regularly provide customers with reports of our costs as the contract progresses. The cost information in the reports is accumulated in a manner specified by the requirements of each contract. For example, cost data provided to a customer for a product would typically align to the subcomponents of that product (such as a wing-box on an aircraft) and for services would align to the type of work being performed (such as aircraft sustainment). Our contracts generally allow for the recovery of costs in the pricing of our products and services. Most of our contracts are bid and negotiated with our customers under circumstances in which we are required to disclose our estimated total costs to provide the product or service. This approach for negotiating contracts with our U.S. Government customers generally allows for recovery of our actual costs plus a reasonable profit margin. We also may enter into long-term supply contracts for certain materials or components to coincide with the production schedule of certain products and to ensure their availability at known unit prices.

We have a number of programs that are designated as classified by the U.S. Government, and that cannot be specifically described. The operating results of these classified programs are included in our consolidated and business segment results and are subject to the same oversight and internal controls as our other programs.

Our net sales are primarily derived from long-term contracts for products and services provided to the U.S. Government as well as FMS contracted through the U.S. Government. We recognize revenue as performance obligations are satisfied and the customer obtains control of the products and services. For performance obligations to deliver products with continuous transfer of control to the customer, revenue is recognized based on the extent of progress towards completion of the performance obligation, generally using the percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost measure of progress for our contracts because it best depicts the transfer of control to the customer as we incur costs on our contracts. For performance obligations in which control does not continuously transfer to the customer, we recognize revenue at the point in time in which each performance obligation is fully satisfied.

Many of our contracts span several years and include highly complex technical requirements. At the outset of a contract accounted for under the percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost method, we identify and monitor risks to the achievement of the technical, schedule and cost aspects of the contract and assess the effects of those risks on our estimates of sales and total costs to complete the contract, as well as our ability to earn variable consideration. The estimates consider the technical requirements (e.g., a newly developed product versus a mature product), the schedule and associated tasks (e.g., the number and type of milestone events) and costs (e.g., material, labor, subcontractor, overhead and the estimated costs to fulfill our industrial

38

Table of Contents

cooperation agreements, sometimes referred to as offset or localization agreements, required under certain contracts with international customers). The initial profit booking rate of each contract considers risks surrounding the ability to achieve the technical requirements, schedule and costs in the initial estimated total costs to complete the contract and variable considerations. Profit booking rates may increase during the performance of the contract if we successfully retire risks related to the technical, schedule and cost aspects of the contract, which decreases the estimated total costs to complete the contract or may increase the variable consideration we expect to receive on the contract. Conversely, our profit booking rates may decrease if the estimated total costs to complete the contract increase or our estimates of variable consideration we expect to receive decrease. The profit booking rate may also be adjusted if the total estimated value of the contract changes or there is a contract modification. All of the estimates are subject to change during the performance of the contract and may affect the profit booking rate. For further discussion on fixed-price contracts, see “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Changes in net sales and operating profit generally are expressed in terms of volume, contract mix, and/or performance (referred to as profit booking rate adjustments). Changes in volume refer to increases or decreases in sales or operating profit resulting from varying production activity levels, deliveries or service levels on individual contracts. Volume changes in segment operating profit are typically based on the current profit booking rate for a particular contract. Contract mix primarily refers to changes in the ratio of contract type or life cycle (e.g., cost-type, fixed-price, development, production and/or sustainment) and other cost recoveries.

Comparability of our segment sales, operating profit and operating margin may be impacted favorably or unfavorably by changes in profit booking rates on our contracts. Increases in the profit booking rates, typically referred to as favorable profit booking rate adjustments, usually relate to revisions in the estimated total costs to fulfill the performance obligations that reflect improved conditions on a particular contract. Conversely, conditions on a particular contract may deteriorate, resulting in an increase in the estimated total costs to fulfill the performance obligations and a reduction in the profit booking rate and are typically referred to as unfavorable profit booking rate adjustments. Increases or decreases in profit booking rates are recognized in the period they are determined and reflect the inception-to-date effect of such changes. Segment operating profit and margin can be impacted favorably or unfavorably by, for example, certain items listed below, which may or may not impact sales. Favorable items include the positive resolution of contractual matters, cost recoveries on severance and restructuring, insurance recoveries and gains on sales of assets. Unfavorable items include the adverse resolution of contractual matters, supply chain disruptions, restructuring charges (except for significant severance actions, which are excluded from segment operating results), reserves for disputes, certain asset impairments, and losses on sales of certain assets.

Our consolidated net profit booking rate adjustments decreased segment operating profit by approximately $180 million in 2024 and increased segment operating profit by $1.6 billion in 2023. The impact in 2024 includes losses of $555 million recognized on a classified program at our Aeronautics business segment, reach-forward losses of $1.4 billion recognized on a classified program at our MFC business segment and $155 million of favorable profit rate adjustments following the resolution of a long-standing claim associated with a completed C-5 Galaxy aircraft contract. The impact in 2023 included an unfavorable profit adjustment of $100 million on the Canadian Maritime Helicopter Program (CMHP) and a $65 million favorable profit adjustment as a result of a positive resolution of a contractual matter on an international surveillance and control program at our RMS business segment. See the discussions under “Revenue Recognition” in “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies” included in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information.

Aeronautics

Our Aeronautics business segment is engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration, sustainment, support and upgrade of advanced military aircraft, including combat and air mobility aircraft, unmanned air vehicles and related technologies. Aeronautics’ major programs include the F-35 Lightning II, C‐130 Hercules, F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-22 Raptor. Aeronautics’ operating results included the following (in millions):

Aeronautics’ net sales in 2024 increased $1.1 billion, or 4%, compared to 2023. The increase was primarily attributable to higher net sales of $1.0 billion on the F-35 program due to higher volume on sustainment, production and development contracts; and $210 million on the F-16 program due to the ramp up on production; partially offset by $200 million on

39

Table of Contents

classified programs primarily driven by the sales impact of recognizing losses on one contract (see “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies”), partially offset by higher volume across the classified programs portfolio.

Aeronautics’ operating profit in 2024 decreased $302 million, or 11%, compared to 2023. The decrease in operating profit was attributable to $375 million of lower profit booking rate adjustments, partially offset by $120 million from higher volume and program ramp up described above. The decrease in profit booking rate adjustments was primarily due to $555 million of losses recognized on a classified contract (see “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies”); partially offset by $155 million of favorable profit rate adjustments following the resolution of a long-standing claim associated with a completed C-5 Galaxy aircraft contract.

Backlog

Backlog increased in 2024 compared to 2023 primarily due to higher orders on the F-35 program.

Missiles and Fire Control

Our MFC business segment provides air and missile defense systems; tactical missiles and precision strike weapon systems; logistics; fire control systems; mission operations support, readiness, engineering support and integration services; manned and unmanned ground vehicles; and energy management solutions. MFC’s major programs include PAC‐3, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS), Precision Strike Missile (PrSM), Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), Hellfire, Apache fire control system, Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod (SNIPER®), Infrared Search and Track (IRST21®), Special Operations Forces Global Logistics Support Services (SOF GLSS), hypersonics programs and Javelin. MFC’s operating results included the following (in millions):

MFC’s net sales in 2024 increased $1.4 billion, or 13%, compared to 2023. The increase was primarily attributable to higher net sales of $1.2 billion for tactical and strike missile programs due to production ramp up on GMLRS, LRASM and JASSM; and $145 million for integrated air and missile defense programs due to production ramp up on PAC-3.

MFC’s operating profit in 2024 decreased $1.1 billion, or 73%, compared to 2023. The decrease in operating profit was attributable to $1.2 billion of lower profit booking rate adjustments, which includes $1.4 billion in losses on a classified program (see “Note 1 – Organization and Significant Accounting Policies”), partially offset by the production ramp up described above.

Backlog

Backlog increased in 2024 compared to 2023 primarily due to higher orders on PAC-3, JASSM and GMLRS programs.

Rotary and Mission Systems

RMS designs, manufactures, services and supports various military and commercial helicopters, surface ships, sea and land-based missile defense systems, radar systems, laser systems, sea and air-based mission and combat systems, command and control mission solutions, cyber solutions, and simulation and training solutions. RMS’ major programs include Aegis Combat System, Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), Multi-Mission Surface Combatant (MMSC), Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC), Black Hawk and Seahawk helicopters, CH-53K King Stallion heavy lift helicopter, Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH), VH-92A helicopter, and the C2BMC program. RMS’ operating results included the following (in millions):

40

Table of Contents

RMS’ net sales in 2024 increased $1.0 billion, or 6%, compared to the same period in 2023. The increase was primarily attributable to higher net sales of $750 million on IWSS programs due to higher volume on radar programs, the CSC program and new program ramp up within the laser systems portfolio; $175 million for various C6ISR programs due to higher volume; and $140 million for Sikorsky helicopter programs due to higher production volume on the CH-53K program, partially offset by lower volume on the VH-92A program.

RMS’ operating profit in 2024 increased $56 million, or 3%, compared to the same period in 2023. The increase in operating profit was attributable to $115 million from higher volume described above and $85 million from favorable contract mix and cost recoveries, partially offset by $155 million of lower profit booking rate adjustments. The decrease in profit booking rate adjustments was due to unfavorable profit rate adjustments on the Seahawk production program, partially offset by the net impact in 2023 of both a $100 million unfavorable profit rate adjustment on CMHP and a $65 million favorable profit rate adjustment on an international surveillance and control program that did not recur in 2024.

Backlog

Backlog increased in 2024 compared to 2023 primarily due to higher orders on IWSS and C6ISR programs.

Space

Our Space business segment is engaged in the research and design, development, engineering and production of satellites, space transportation systems, and strategic, advanced strike and defensive systems. Space provides network-enabled situational awareness and integrates complex space and ground global systems to help our customers gather, analyze, and securely distribute critical intelligence data. Space is also responsible for various classified systems and services in support of vital national security systems. Space’s major programs include the Trident II D5 Fleet Ballistic Missile (FBM), Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (Orion), Next Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared (Next Gen OPIR) system, Global Positioning System (GPS) III, hypersonics and transport layer programs and Next Generation Interceptor (NGI). Operating profit for our Space business segment includes our share of earnings for our investment in United Launch Alliance (ULA), which provides expendable launch services to the U.S. Government and commercial customers. Space’s operating results included the following (in millions):

Operating margin 9.8 % 9.2 % 9.2 %

Space’s net sales in 2024 decreased $126 million, or 1%, compared to the same period in 2023. The decrease was primarily attributable to lower net sales of $320 million for national security space programs due to lower volume on classified programs and $145 million for commercial civil space due to lower volume on the Orion program, partially offset by higher volume on other space exploration programs. These decreases were partially offset by higher net sales of $255 million for strategic and missile defense programs due to higher volume on FBM and reentry programs.