Azad Engineering share price today

Azad Engineering Ltd's share price was ₹2,422.70 at the close on 6 November 2026. It has been rising for 29 weeks. That is 5.5% above its average price over the last 200 trading days. In the last 52 weeks it traded between ₹1,391 and ₹2,910, and at that close it sat 68% of the way up from that low.

A share price tends to move through four phases: moving sideways (stage 1), rising (stage 2), stalling near a high (stage 3) and falling (stage 4). Today Azad Engineering Ltd is in stage 2. The phase helps read everything below.

Over the past 13 weeks it has done worse than the NIFTY 500, and it has been behind for 1 week running.

Over the last 2.9 years the share price moved +250% while the NIFTY 500 moved +13%, so it is ahead of the index over that whole period. It was last ahead over 13 weeks in the week of 30 October 2026. The chart above shows the 13-week comparison for every week.

This page treats a rise as over when the price closes below its 200-day average on two Fridays in a row.

Three changes stood out: revenue up on a year earlier for 11 quarters in a row (every quarter we can compare), foreign funds (FIIs) cut their stake for 5 quarters in a row and profit up on a year earlier for 9 quarters in a row.

1. Revenue up on a year earlier for 11 quarters in a row (every quarter we can compare)

   In the June 2026 quarter revenue was ₹173 crore, +26.3% on a year earlier.

   Why: Sales rose because both main businesses grew. Aerospace and defense grew faster, and energy and oil and gas also grew, helped by more work for global aviation customers and first engine and defense system deliveries.

   Next results: check whether completed customer qualifications turn full production into faster reported revenue.

   From the earnings call on 8 Aug 2026.

2. Foreign funds (FIIs) cut their stake for 5 quarters in a row

   From 16.2% to 12.7% of the company by the September 2026 quarter.

3. Profit up on a year earlier for 9 quarters in a row

   In the June 2026 quarter profit was ₹35 crore, +20.7% on a year earlier.

   Why: Profit rose because the company got more of its materials locally and spent less on transport.

   Next results: check whether profit holds up as new staff and machines start running.

   From the earnings call on 8 Aug 2026.

For April to June 2026 (the quarter ended 30 June 2026), Azad Engineering reported revenue of ₹173 crore, up 26.3% from ₹137 crore a year earlier, and a profit of ₹35.0 crore, up 20.7% from ₹29.0 crore.

Azad Engineering results: April to June 2026 against a year earlier

The next results, for July to September 2026, are due by 14 November 2026: listed companies must publish quarterly results within 45 days of the quarter's end (60 days for the January to March quarter).

Azad Engineering's management discussed these results on a call held on 8 August 2026; what it said is further down this page.

From the company's reported quarterly results (quarter ended 30 June 2026). Revenue and profit in ₹ crore.

Azad Engineering closed at ₹2,422.70 on 6 November 2026, up 50.4% from ₹1,611.20 a year earlier (7 November 2025) and up 250.1% over three years. Its highest weekly close since December 2023 was ₹2,910.20 on 9 October 2026.

Azad Engineering share price: then and now

Weekly closing prices. Each change is the move from that price to the 6 Nov 2026 close. A day's intraday high or low can go beyond these weekly closes.

157 weekly closes from 29 December 2023 to 6 November 2026.

6 Nov 2026: Azad Engineering closed at ₹2,422.70, down 0.9% on the week and down 16.8% on the month. 8 Aug 2026: Azad Engineering held its results call for April to June 2026. Management guided: FY27 revenue growth above 25%.

Earlier

• Results for April to June 2026: Revenue up 26.3% and profit up 20.7% on a year earlier.

Azad Engineering has paid no dividend on the NSE since its first NSE close in our records (29 December 2023), the start of the period we checked.

No. Azad Engineering Ltd paid out 0% of its profit as dividends in each of its last 6 reported years, so there is no payout history to show. That comes from the filed annual statements, not an estimate.

From the NSE corporate-actions record, read 7 November 2026.

On the call for April to June 2026, held on 8 August 2026, Azad Engineering's management guided: FY27 revenue growth above 25%.

“This is not a story of some years; it is a story of a few months. This is what we have been told, and we have been guided to prepare for massive production of these engines.”Rakesh Chopdar, on the call for April to June 2026

What management guided

• Operating margin guidance remains 32-35% for calculation purposes.
• Stabilization initiatives were 80% complete; remaining work due by mid-Q2 and full closure by Q3, with substantive revenue from H2 and Q3/Q4 acceleration.
• New customer-dedicated campus potential approximately ₹1,200 crore at full utilization, based on ₹150-180 crore per plant.
• Working capital planned around 200 days in H1 and 160-180 days in H2; bill discounting expected to reduce debtor days to 90 and fully hedge exports by Q4.

Management’s own plans and goals, from our notes of the call. A plan is not a result.

Source: the call transcript.

From the call for April to June 2026, 8 August 2026.

What is changing at Azad Engineering, from the latest results and calls: order book consumption, 11x revenue, five-year visibility, operating leverage inflection, new plants moving to 70-80% utilisation and client mining, single-digit wallet share with all major oems.

• Order Book Consumption, 11x Revenue, Five-Year Visibility. ₹6,500 crore order book (~$700 M) distributed Energy/A&D/Oil&Gas at 11x FY26 revenue; five-year consumption at 25%+ pace; additional contracts undisclosed due to customer confidentiality. ⚠ estimate
• Operating Leverage Inflection, New Plants Moving to 70-80% Utilisation. Four dedicated plants at different stabilisation stages; as utilisation exceeds 70-80%, operating margin expected to breach 37% and asset turns move to 1.7-2.0x. ⚠ estimate
• Client Mining, Single-Digit Wallet Share With All Major OEMs. 1-1.5% wallet share with GE, Siemens, Mitsubishi, Safran, P&W, Rolls-Royce, structural multi-year runway that compounds independently of new customer wins. ⚠ estimate

We check 16 kinds of change in every company, such as costs spread over more sales, higher-value products, new orders, new regions or falling debt, against its reported numbers and what management said on its calls. Only changes the numbers back are shown.

Our read after the latest results, written 17 May 2026.

Order book ₹6,500 crore (11-12x FY26 revenue) with five-year forward visibility; Energy ~$400 M, A&D ~$200 M+, Oil & Gas ~$100 M+; additional contracts not publicly disclosable.

✓ fact

Our read after the latest results, written 17 May 2026.

Inventory elevated deliberately for plant ramp stocking (96% of inventory <1Y old); ₹309 crore receivables; free cash flow conversion suppressed to ~55%; normalization to 160-170 days H2 FY27 is management's commitment.

The main risks

• Working Capital Elevation, Inventory Cycle 200+ Days, free cash flow Suppressed: Inventory elevated deliberately for plant ramp stocking (96% of inventory <1Y old); ₹309 crore receivables; free cash flow conversion suppressed to ~55%; normalization to 160-170 days H2 FY27 is management's commitment. ✓ fact
• New Plant Qualification & Utilisation Ramp Risk: Four additional plants planned by end FY27; each facility requires customer audits and certification before full production, any delay pushes operating leverage inflection from FY28 to FY29. ✓ fact
• Tariff Risk on 93.9% Export Revenue: 93.9% export revenue; FOB Hyderabad structure; mission-critical component positioning mitigates impact, no OEM can quickly find alternative suppliers for qualified precision parts. ✓ fact

Our read after the latest results, written 17 May 2026.

When Azad Engineering reports July to September 2026, these are the 4 checks that show whether the story is still on course. First: Turbojet testing and successive engine output - check for documented GTRE/MoD program confirmation and follow-on orders.

Azad Engineering is on 2 of our India lists: Small & mid cap stocks and Defence stocks.

Azad Engineering Ltd earned ₹35.0 Cr of net profit in the Jun 2026 quarter, +20.7% on the same quarter a year earlier. That is the 9th quarter in a row of profit growth. Full-year FY26 profit was ₹134 Cr. Over 5 years profit has grown 62.0% a year on average. That is 20.2% of the quarter's revenue.

Net profit is what is left after every cost, interest and tax. Earnings per share, dividends and book value all grow from it.

The same quarter a year earlier earned ₹29.0 Cr.

For the full year, FY26 profit was ₹134 Cr (+54.0% on the year before).

Why profit moved: revenue changed +26.3% on a year earlier and the margin moved +1.0 percentage points. Sales did the work, and the margin was about flat.

On average over the last four quarters, profit changed +42.9% and revenue +29.2%. Profit is growing faster than sales: fixed costs are spread over more sales, so each extra rupee of revenue adds more to profit.

Azad Engineering Ltd reported ₹173 Cr of revenue in the Jun 2026 quarter, +26.3% on the same quarter a year earlier. That is the 11th quarter in a row with growth on the year before. Over 5 years it has grown 37.4% a year on average. The last full year, FY26, came in at ₹603 Cr.

Revenue is everything the company billed its customers in the period.

Why this happened. The order book is the primary underpin of the multi-year thesis. At Rs 6,500 Cr net of FY26 deliveries, it represents 11x trailing revenue with firm customer production schedules. The composition — ~$400 M Energy, ~$200 M A&D, ~$100 M Oil & Gas, is confirmed with additional undisclosed contracts hinting at a larger true backlog. For the first time in the company's history, all three execution levers (capacity, qualifications, customer schedules) are simultaneously aligned. This is what makes the FY27 inflection structurally different from prior years when capacity constrained fulfilment.

The last four reported quarters add to ₹640 Cr.

FY26 revenue was ₹603 Cr, +31.9% on the year before.

Recent pace: the last four quarters grew +29.2% on average, against 37.4% a year over the longer run, so this year is growing slower than its own long-run rate.

Is growth speeding up? Revenue over the last 12 months grew +29.0%, against +32.8% a year over the last 8 quarters (rolling over); profit over the last 12 months grew +41.4%, against +43.5% a year (stabilising).

Azad Engineering Ltd's operating margin was 37.0% in the Jun 2026 quarter, 1.0 percentage points higher than the same quarter a year ago. Its latest full-year margin is the highest it has ever reported. Across 6 years it has been between 23.0% and 37.0%. The latest quarter is within that range.

Operating margin is what is left from every ₹100 of sales after the costs of running the business, before interest and tax. It shows pricing power and cost control.

Why this happened. Airfoil supply is the next frontier. The global market is dominated by Howmet Aerospace and PCC. Azad's 2.5-year qualification cycle with Rolls-Royce is described as fast by industry standards. Once Rolls-Royce enters commercial production (Q4 FY27/early FY28), P&W and Safran follow automatically, same qualification infrastructure. The HTT engine delivery validates indigenous engine manufacturing capability, a strategic moat for defence programs. These are not yet in the revenue model; they represent optionality worth pricing at a premium.

Why the margin moved: operating margin changed +1.4 percentage points on the year while gross margin changed +6.6 points. So the gain came mostly from the gross margin, which means input costs and prices charged.

As noted under valuation: when margins are at a record, every ratio built on profit looks better than usual, so a low multiple can mislead.

Over the last 3 years Azad Engineering Ltd's operations used more cash than they brought in, so cash conversion was −26%, a gap worth watching. In FY26 its operations used ₹119 Cr of cash, against ₹134 Cr of profit. After ₹573 Cr of spending on assets, free cash was −₹692 Cr: it spent more than its operations brought in.

The profit and loss account shows what was earned. The cash-flow statement shows the cash that actually came in. Comparing operating cash flow with profit is one of the best checks that a profit is real.

Cash-flow figures here are yearly, because quarterly cash statements are not published, so this section changes once a year.

Why: the cash figure is clear, but the day counts behind it are not in our data, so we show it without guessing the reason.

What to look at next: the main use of cash is spending on assets. The next section checks what that spending is building.

Azad Engineering Ltd's customer, stock and supplier day counts come out in the thousands of days on sales this small (₹603 Cr in FY26), so no cash-cycle chart is drawn and this section looks at its spending on assets instead. It spent ₹884 Cr on assets over the last 3 years.

Working capital is the cash tied up between paying suppliers and getting paid. Debtor days: how long customers take to pay. Inventory days: how long stock sits. The cash cycle: the whole loop, in days of sales.

Averaged over those years that is 48.9% of FY26 revenue a year.

Spending on assets: ₹884 Cr over the last 3 years, against ₹103 Cr of depreciation (the yearly wear and tear on existing assets). So it is building well beyond replacing what wears out. Work still in progress is ₹257 Cr (FY26): assets paid for that are not earning yet.

In short: the cash is going into new capacity, not getting stuck in the daily cycle. The question is whether the new capacity earns.

Azad Engineering Ltd's P/E is 112.5×, in the middle of its own history: higher than 45% of past readings. Its usual P/E (the middle reading) is 115.5×, over 2.4 years of weekly prices. This compares the share price with the company’s own past. It does not say what the business is worth.

P/E is the share price divided by a year's profit per share: how many rupees the market pays for each rupee of yearly profit.

Why this happened. Four dedicated plants at different stabilisation stages; as utilisation exceeds 70-80%, EBITDA margin expected to breach 37% and asset turns move to 1.7-2.0x.

Keep one thing in mind: margins are the best this company has ever reported. A multiple that looks low against its own past can mislead when profit is at a record. If margins fall back, today's multiple is higher than it looks.

Why the multiple is where it is: over the past year earnings per share moved +52.2% while the price moved +50.4%. Earnings did better than the price, which pulled the multiple down within its own range.

In short: the multiple is about average against its own past, so the earnings trend underneath matters more than the multiple.

Azad Engineering Ltd's business is giving mixed signals. Growth is slowing from a very fast pace: profit growth has eased from +58.4% at its peak to +41.4%, but the business is still expanding, with ROCE steady at 12.4%. This is based on 12 quarters of 4 measures.

Every business is somewhere on a path of getting better or worse, and this section names where. The last 12 quarters of growth in revenue, profit and earnings per share, plus the return the business earns on its capital, are read as lines. Getting worse: the lines are falling. Turning around: a low point has just formed and the last few quarters are rising from it. Getting better: the rise from the low has lasted. Growing steadily: steady growth with healthy returns. Slowing from a peak: still high, but slowing. When the lines disagree the result is mixed; too little history means no reading. CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is the steady yearly rate that would turn the starting value into the latest one. It is the fairest way to compare growth over different periods. If the 1-year figure is much bigger than the 10-year one, recent growth is running faster than the long-run trend. A dash means there is no figure for that period, or the starting year was a loss, where a growth rate means nothing.

Why it matters: when the lines disagree, each line above matters more than any single label.

Compound annual growth rate (%)

Compound annual growth rate over each period, %. Revenue, profit and EPS come from yearly figures; the share price row is price growth over the same periods. A dash means no figure for that period, or the starting year was a loss.

Azad Engineering Ltd's story is not scored yet against the checks our research set on 17 May 2026. Where it sits in its own cycle: FIRST EXPANSION.

NOT YET CHECKED

Our read, 17 May 2026. A precision-engineering moat being built in real time, eight OEM-dedicated plants, a 11x order book, and single-digit wallet share with the world's biggest turbine makers.

From the price. Price stage 2, week 29, above its 200-day line, relative strength falling.

From the research. A precision-engineering moat being built in real time, eight OEM-dedicated plants, a 11x order book, and single-digit wallet share with the world's biggest turbine makers.

What is proven. A precision-engineering moat being built in real time, eight OEM-dedicated plants, a 11x order book, and single-digit wallet share with the world's biggest turbine makers.

What is not proven yet. Three documented cross-call contradictions: revenue guidance moderation, jet engine delivery slipped twice, WC goal revised upward each call. Financial outcomes beat; strategic timelines need a buffer.

The test written in advance. Management Milestone Credibility, Strategic Timelines Carry 1-2Q Buffer. Measured by: Management Milestone Credibility, Strategic Timelines Carry 1-2Q Buffer Rolls-Royce batch delivery (goal H2 FY27): any further delay pushes commercial ramp to FY28+ by the next result.

The test written in advance. Working Capital Elevation, Inventory Cycle 200+ Days, FCF Suppressed. Measured by: Working Capital Elevation, Inventory Cycle 200+ Days, FCF Suppressed H1 FY27 inventory days, management committed to 'drastic change' to ~200 days; H2 FY27 goal 160-170 days by the next result.

The test written in advance. New Plant Qualification & Utilisation Ramp Risk. Measured by: New Plant Qualification & Utilisation Ramp Risk Q1 and Q2 FY27 concalls: plant commissioning progress, customer audit timelines for new facilities by the next result.

The key numbers to watch, and the level that would change the picture

Everything further down this page is evidence for or against these.

• 1 · Operating leveragebuilding
• 2 · Value-added mixquiet
• 3 · Management changebuilding
• 4 · Paying down debtbuilding
• 5 · Regulatory approvalquiet
• 6 · Order-book winsbuilding
• 7 · Consolidationquiet
• 8 · Demerger or value unlockbuilding
• 9 · Buybackquiet
• 10 · New geographiesbuilding
• 11 · More business from existing customersquiet
• 12 · New product launchquiet
• 13 · Mandatory normsquiet
• 14 · A bigger market to servequiet
• 15 · Market-share gainsquiet
• 16 · Asset qualityquiet

Lever 6 · Order-book wins: building. Rs 6,500 Cr order book (~$700 M) distributed Energy/A&D/Oil&Gas at 11x FY26 revenue; five-year consumption at 25%+ pace; additional contracts undisclosed due to customer confidentiality. What proves it keeps working: Order Book Consumption, 11x Revenue, Five-Year Visibility. It stops working if Rolls-Royce batch delivery (goal H2 FY27): any further delay pushes commercial ramp to FY28+.

Lever 8 · Demerger or value unlock: building. Four dedicated plants at different stabilisation stages; as utilisation exceeds 70-80%, EBITDA margin expected to breach 37% and asset turns move to 1.7-2.0x. What proves it keeps working: Operating Leverage Inflection, New Plants Moving to 70-80% Utilisation. It stops working if Rolls-Royce batch delivery (goal H2 FY27): any further delay pushes commercial ramp to FY28+.

Lever 4 · Paying down debt: building. 1-1.5% wallet share with GE, Siemens, Mitsubishi, Safran, P&W, Rolls-Royce, structural multi-year runway that compounds independently of new customer wins. What proves it keeps working: Client Mining, Single-Digit Wallet Share With All Major OEMs. It stops working if Rolls-Royce batch delivery (goal H2 FY27): any further delay pushes commercial ramp to FY28+.

Lever 1 · Operating leverage: building. Rolls-Royce airfoil first batch H2 FY27; P&W and Safran follow same cycle; HTT engine delivery imminent, all represent TAM expansion into higher-barrier, higher-margin product segments. What proves it keeps working: Next-Gen Qualification Pipeline, Rolls-Royce / P&W / Safran / HTT Engine. It stops working if Rolls-Royce batch delivery (goal H2 FY27): any further delay pushes commercial ramp to FY28+.

Sources: our stock research file (17 May 2026) · quarterly results through Jun 2026 · the company’s own earnings calls. The story check is re-scored every results season; the record below never changes.

The whole page in one table. Each row links to its section.

What Azad Engineering Ltd's management promised, against what actually happened: 4 promises on the record. Read straight from the company’s own earnings calls. A promise that slipped stays on this page after it is met.

Rolls-Royce Qualification Timeline Pulled Forward · 8 August 2026. In May 2026, management expected the first Rolls-Royce qualification batch in H2 FY '27, with momentum only from Q4 FY '27 or early FY '28. In Aug 2026, management moved the first batch forward to the current quarter without explaining a change in the qualification schedule, which is a material acceleration for a qualification-dependent program.

Working Capital Goal Deteriorated Versus Earlier Guidance · 8 August 2026. The Feb 2026 call planned 140-150 working capital days by H2, while the Aug 2026 call planned 160-180 days. The latest range no longer reaches the earlier goal and represents a meaningful deterioration in cash conversion, with no explanation for why the 140-150 day objective was abandoned.

Turbojet Engine Delivery Missed Earlier Near-Term Timetable · 8 August 2026. The Feb 2026 call indicated that the engine could be delivered within a couple of months, and the May 2026 call described delivery as weeks away. The latest call identifies July 22 as the delivery milestone, indicating that the project took materially longer than the earlier near-term expectations without explaining the slippage.

Upward Revision of Goal Inventory Cycle · 16 May 2026. During the Feb 2026 call, management established a specific goal to reduce the inventory cycle to 140-150 days for the second half of the performance cycle, expressing high confidence in supply chain optimizations and a new distribution network. In the May 2026 call, management revised this goal upward to 160-170 days for the same period. This indicates that the previously stated operational efficiencies and working capital improvements are moving more slowly than originally communicated to the market.

Every quote above is taken word for word from the company’s own earnings calls.

Azad Engineering Ltd earned a ROCE of 12% in FY26. Its return on capital used (ROIC) is 4.9 percentage points below its cost of capital, so growth here does not yet pay for the capital it uses. It comes from a 22.2% net margin and 0.27× asset turnover (sales divided by assets).

Return on capital employed (ROCE) is the profit the whole business earns on all the money in it, from shareholders and lenders together. It is the best single test of whether growth adds value or just size.

Why the return is what it is (FY26): a 22.2% net margin × 0.27× asset turnover × 1.44× leverage (assets divided by equity) ≈ 8.6% on equity. The margin does most of the work; borrowing plays a small part, so this return is earned, not borrowed.

The key test, return on capital used minus the cost of capital: 7.1% − 12.0% = −4.9 percentage points. The 12.0% is a standard assumption for the cost of capital in India, not an estimate for this company. Read the sign and size of the gap, not the decimals. Negative: growth at these returns loses value until returns improve.

Azad Engineering Ltd has total debt of ₹474 Cr against shareholder equity of ₹1,529 Cr as of Jun 2026, so its debt is 0.31× its equity. Year by year, that ratio went from 1.48 in FY23 to 0.31 in FY26. Keep that borrowing in mind when reading the returns on this page.

Debt-to-equity shows how much of the business is paid for with borrowed money. Lower is safer, and the direction matters as much as the level.

Why this happened. The client-mining thesis is structural, not cyclical. Azad is a qualified and trusted supplier on the lowest-margin fringes of OEM bills of materials. As plant footprint grows and qualifications deepen, cross-category and cross-platform expansion happens organically. The Mitsubishi hot-section nozzle vane win, eight-year single-source combustor supply, is the clearest manifestation: Azad moved from periphery to the highest-barrier segment. This pattern is repeatable across the entire OEM roster.

Promoters cut their stake in Azad Engineering Ltd by 10.1 percentage points over 8 quarters, the biggest change among its owners. Promoters now own 55.8% of the company. Domestic institutions moved +4.7 points over the same period, to 10.4%. This uses the four owner groups that companies report every quarter; nothing is guessed between filings.

Who owns the company each quarter: promoters (the founders or controlling owners), foreign institutions, domestic institutions such as mutual funds, and the public. When people close to the business steadily raise their stake, that is worth noticing; a quiet list is also an answer.

Over the last two years: Promoters: −10.1 points over 8 quarters, to 55.8%; Domestic institutions: +4.7 points over 8 quarters, to 10.4%; Foreign institutions: +3.0 points over 8 quarters, to 12.7%.

Why the owners changed: promoters drove it (−10.1 points), with the other side taken by domestic institutions (+4.7 points). They reduced their stake.

For Azad Engineering Ltd, the Z-score is not available, so we say so rather than guess one. It estimates how far the balance sheet is from trouble; it is not a forecast of failure. The debt, cash-flow and return sections show the balance-sheet figures we do have, each with its own date.

The Z-score estimates how far a company is from balance-sheet trouble. Above about 3 is safe; below about 1.8 is the danger zone. It was built for manufacturers, so it is not used for banks and lenders.

57.7 out of 100, rank 6 of 25 in Aerospace & Defence - Equipments, with 89% of the evidence available.

Azad Engineering Ltd scores 57.7 out of 100 against the 25 companies it is compared with in Aerospace & Defence - Equipments, ranking 6. The evidence is balanced: no factor stands out, so another reported quarter is needed before the picture is clearer.

The four parts add up to the total exactly: 21.4 + 12.4 + 9 + 14.9 = 57.7. This is the same number shown on the industry page; it is worked out once for the whole group and read here.

What would change it: The score would fall if profit growth turns negative or margins stop improving while the share price lags its sector.

Azad Engineering ranks 6 of 25 Aerospace & Defence - Equipments companies on the 4-Factor Sector Score, with 57.7 out of 100.

Missing figures are not scored as bad. They lower the confidence and pull the final score toward the middle. Relative strength counts only when the company has a reading for this week; with no reading, that factor is left out and its 20 points are shared across the other three in proportion. PEG is not shown when the ratio cannot mean anything: the company must be making a profit, its price-to-earnings must be positive, and its three-year earnings growth must fall between 5% and 60%. Dividing a price multiple by a loss, or by growth measured off a tiny base, produces a number that looks precise and tells you nothing. Under relative strength, one mark per week shows the last 12 weeks: a mark is filled where the company led NIFTY 500 by 5% or more over the 13 weeks ending that week, which is the same test used everywhere on this site. Price stage places the company on the same six-step path the industry is placed on (basing, turning, breaking out, leader, fading, asleep), read from how many weeks running it has led NIFTY 500 and whether that lead is growing or shrinking. It describes where the share price stands, not the direction of earnings, and it is not a recommendation; it is left blank for a company whose weekly history is too short or too stale to read.

The figures in this ranking come from the industry comparison: results through the Sep 2026 quarter, and the P/E at that quarter's end. The sections above use the latest weekly price, so a P/E or return there can differ a little from the one here. The stage words in this ranking (such as losing its lead or breaking out) describe the lead over the index, not the price phase in the price section.

Related companies: Aerospace & Defence - Equipments, all 25 compared on one page.

Azad Engineering is the 7th largest of 25 Aerospace & Defence - Equipments companies on Sector Alpha by market value (scores of 30 October 2026). Just above it: Data Patterns (India), MTAR Technologies and Sigma Advanced System. Just below it: BEML, Apollo Micro Systems and Zen Technologies.

Aerospace & Defence - Equipments companies close in size

4. Data Patterns (India) Ltd ₹21,274 crore
5. MTAR Technologies Ltd ₹21,033 crore
6. Sigma Advanced System Ltd ₹16,915 crore
7. Azad Engineering Ltd ₹16,687 crore
8. BEML Ltd ₹16,572 crore
9. Apollo Micro Systems Ltd ₹16,163 crore
10. Zen Technologies Ltd ₹15,601 crore

All 25 Aerospace & Defence - Equipments companies, largest first

Companies close in size in other industries

409. Sigma Advanced System Ltd ₹16,915 crore · Aerospace & Defence - Equipments
410. Engineers India Ltd ₹16,785 crore · Infra - Engineering - General
411. Azad Engineering Ltd ₹16,687 crore
412. Ola Electric Mobility Ltd ₹16,586 crore · Auto - 2 & 3 Wheelers
413. BEML Ltd ₹16,572 crore · Aerospace & Defence - Equipments

Sector Alpha, written by code from the published numbers. Data as of 6 November 2026.

Every chart on this page is drawn by code from the published figures, with no forecasts and no price opinions.

See the plain-text version of this page.