NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP /DE/

The following discussion should be read along with the financial statements included in this Form 10-K, as well as Part II, “Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” (MD&A) of our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 (“2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K”). To the extent the January 1, 2025 SSAS realignment impacted the disclosures in the 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K, we recast those prior year disclosures herein.

Divestiture of Training Services Business

On May 24, 2025 (the “Divestiture date”), the company completed its previously announced sale of substantially all

of the Immersive Mission Solutions (IMS) operating unit of Defense Systems (the “training services” business or

“divestiture”) for $333 million in cash and recorded a pre-tax gain on sale of $231 million. IMS is a provider of mission training and satellite ground network communications software for U.S. government customers. Operating results include sales and operating income for the training services business prior to the Divestiture date.

Global Security Environment

The U.S. and its allies continue to face a global security environment of heightened tensions and instability, threats from state and non-state actors, including in particular major global powers, as well as terrorist organizations, increasing nuclear tensions, diverse regional security concerns and political instability. The market for defense products, services and solutions globally is driven by these complex and evolving security challenges, considered in the broader context of political and socioeconomic circumstances and priorities. Our operations and financial performance, as well as demand for our products and services, are impacted by these events, including global unrest. The same is true for our suppliers and other business partners.

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, recent events in Venezuela and threats elsewhere, particularly in the Middle East and the Western Pacific region, have increased global tensions and instability and highlighted security requirements globally, including in Europe, the Middle East, the Pacific region and Latin America, as well as the U.S. These conflicts have resulted in and may continue to result in increased demand for defense products and services from allies and partner nations, particularly in those regions. For example, we experienced an increase in demand for certain of our products and services directly and indirectly related to the conflict in Ukraine. We continue to monitor developments in these regions, but have not experienced, and do not anticipate experiencing, significant adverse financial impacts directly from these conflicts.

We believe the current global security environment, characterized by significant national security threats to the U.S. and its allies, continues to highlight the need for strong deterrence and robust defense capabilities, and we are actively evaluating both opportunities and risks associated with this environment. We believe our capabilities, particularly in space, C4ISR, air and missile defense, battle management, advanced weapons, strategic deterrence, survivable aircraft and mission systems should help our customers in the U.S. and globally defend against current and future threats and, as a result, continue to position us for long-term profitable business growth.

Global Economic Environment

Over the past several years, the global economic environment has experienced challenges, including inflationary pressures; widespread delays and disruptions in supply chains; business slowdowns or shutdowns; workforce challenges and labor shortfalls; and market volatility. These macroeconomic factors can and have contributed, and could continue to contribute, to increased costs, delays, disruptions and other performance challenges, as well as increased competing demands for limited resources to address such increased costs and other challenges, for our company, our suppliers and partners, and our customers. We continue to work to address challenges to our business caused by the macroeconomic environment. We have seen progress in the supply chain as on-time deliveries and quality continue to improve. In remaining areas of pressure, we are proactively working with our suppliers to help meet our contract commitments.

In addition, although interest rates have declined over the past year, they remain elevated compared to recent years and have raised the cost of borrowing for governments. If rates increase or remain elevated, it could impact government spending priorities (in the U.S. and allied countries, in particular), including the demand for defense products. Economic tensions and changes in international trade policies, including, for example, the widespread tariffs announced since last year by the U.S. on its major trading partners, higher tariffs on imported goods and materials and actions taken in response (such as retaliatory tariffs or other trade protectionist measures or the renegotiation of free trade agreements), could also further impact the global market for defense products, services and solutions. The full impact of these governmental actions on macroeconomic conditions and on our business is uncertain, difficult to predict and depends on a number of factors, including the extent and duration of tariffs, any

-27- reversal or temporary suspension of announced tariffs, the availability of exemptions, changes in the amount and scope of tariffs, the imposition of new tariffs and other measures that target countries may take in response to U.S. trade policies, and possible resulting general inflationary pressures in the global economy. We are continuing to monitor the impact on our business, suppliers and customers, but do not believe that the tariffs in effect at this time will have a material adverse effect on our business.

U.S. Political, Budget and Regulatory Environment

The U.S. continues to face an uncertain and evolving political, budget and regulatory environment. In particular, it is difficult to predict the specific course of future defense budgets. Current and future requirements related to the conflict in Ukraine and threats in the Middle East, the Western Pacific and Latin America and other security priorities, as well as the macroeconomic environment, the national debt, and other domestic priorities, among other things, in the U.S. and globally, will continue to impact our customers’ budgets, spending and priorities, and our industry. The U.S. political environment may also impact defense budgets and priorities, issues related to the national debt, and government spending more broadly. We anticipate that issues related to budgetary priorities, defense spending levels and the debt ceiling will continue to be subjects of considerable debate, with a potentially significant impact on our programs and the company.

On July 4, 2025, the FY 2025 reconciliation bill titled the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (the “OBBBA”) was enacted. The OBBBA allocates approximately $150 billion in funds for defense spending, including funding for air and missile defense, munitions, strategic deterrence, shipbuilding and supply chains and other military capabilities, and the appropriated funds will remain available to be obligated until September 30, 2029 and expended through FY 2034. The OBBBA is expected to result in increased investments by the DoW in defense modernization projects and Pacific region deterrence, among other programs. See Note 6 to the financial statements for additional information on key income tax provisions of the OBBBA.

Annual appropriations to fund the federal government for FY 2026 have not yet been enacted. On October 1, 2025, the U.S. Government entered a shutdown, which ended on November 12, 2025. The federal government is currently operating under a continuing resolution (“CR”) that extends funding for most agencies (including DoW) until January 30, 2026. It remains uncertain when the government will approve FY 2026 appropriations and what levels of funding the appropriations will provide. Government operations under an extended CR or a government shutdown could have adverse impacts on our programs and new starts, in particular, and the U.S. Government’s ability to make timely payments.

The Presidential Administration (the “Administration”) has issued numerous executive orders, including orders to undertake a comprehensive overhaul of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, to reform the DoW defense acquisition process and, more recently, to address underperformance and insufficient prioritization of government contracts, insufficient investment in production and production speed and incentive compensation metrics applicable to defense contractors. See “Risk factors” for further discussion regarding risks associated with executive orders and regulatory changes. Some of the Administration’s executive orders are subject to ongoing court challenges. Implementation of certain of these executive orders could adversely affect our business or create a more challenging or costly regulatory, operating and economic environment.

In light of the ongoing conflicts and heightened global instability as well as political tensions and related legal challenges, we expect continued uncertainty in the global security, U.S. political, budget and regulatory environment. Initiatives to reduce governmental spending, federal budget and debt ceiling action, and further changes in U.S. government policy positions, including trade and foreign policy, tax policy and DoW policies or priorities, could materially impact defense spending broadly and the company’s programs in particular.

B-21 Program

In 2015, the U.S. Air Force awarded Northrop Grumman the B-21 contract, which includes a base contract for engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) and five low-rate initial production (LRIP) options for a baseline total of 21 aircraft. The EMD phase of the program is largely cost type and began at contract award. The LRIP options are largely fixed price and are expected to continue to be awarded and executed through approximately the end of the decade. In addition to the five LRIP options, Northrop Grumman and the U.S. Air Force have established not to exceed (NTE) pricing for additional aircraft up to unit 40. The average NTE value for these subsequent lots is above the average unit price of the five LRIP lots, and the NTE lots include an economic price adjustment clause to help protect against certain inflationary pressures. Final terms, quantity, and pricing for these subsequent lots are not fully negotiated. We are in discussions with the U.S. Air Force regarding the potential for an accelerated production rate on the program. While the ultimate outcome of these discussions remains uncertain, we currently expect any agreement to accelerate production rate would require future investment by the

-28- company to expand production capacity along with the opportunity to earn improved returns on the LRIP and NTE phases of the program.

During the fourth quarter of 2023, we recognized a projected loss of $1.56 billion across the five LRIP options. During the first quarter of 2025, we recognized an additional $477 million loss across the five LRIP options. During the fourth quarter of 2025, we again reviewed our estimated profitability on the LRIP phase of the program and made no significant changes to the previously recognized loss.

The company’s 2025 results reflect our current best estimate of cost to complete the LRIP and NTE aircraft, as well as the outcome of ongoing discussions with our suppliers. If our estimated cost to complete the aircraft changes, if we reach an agreement with the customer regarding an accelerated production rate, or if our assumptions regarding contract performance, quantities, supplier negotiations, or funding to mitigate the impact of macroeconomic disruptions are resolved more or less favorably than what we have estimated, our financial position, results of operations and/or cash flows could be materially affected.

Sentinel Program

In 2020, the U.S. Air Force awarded Northrop Grumman a $13.3 billion contract for the EMD phase of the Sentinel program. In January 2024, the U.S. Air Force provided congressional notification that the Sentinel program was under a Nunn-McCurdy breach review, which is required when total program cost estimates exceed certain defined thresholds. This notification, which had been driven primarily by increases in cost estimates for the Production and Deployment phases, commenced the process to achieve certification for continuance of the program and update its baseline cost estimates. We are currently executing under a cost-type contract for the EMD phase, and the Production and Deployment phases are yet to be priced and negotiated.

In July 2024, the Sentinel program was certified for continuation by the DoW upon completion of the Nunn-McCurdy breach review. In connection with the certification, the DoW directed that the program be restructured, including plans for infrastructure related to the command and launch segment, which was the main driver of the increased cost estimates for the Production and Deployment phases.

During the second quarter of 2025, we partnered with the U.S. Air Force in defining the preliminary execution framework necessary for successful restructure of the program. The program restructure will include a revision to the acquisition strategy, joint establishment of a new program baseline, and other critical preparation activities necessary to re-accomplish Milestone B approval. Based on this preliminary execution framework, we updated our estimated profitability on the program and recognized a $76 million favorable estimate-at-completion (EAC) adjustment during the second quarter of 2025 largely related to our expectations for achieving certain contract incentives.

During the fourth quarter of 2025, we reviewed our estimated profitability on the Sentinel program and made no significant changes. If our estimated cost to complete the restructured EMD effort or our expectations for achieving contract incentives are more or less favorable than what we have estimated, our financial position, results of operations and/or cash flows could be materially affected.

Operating Performance Assessment and Reporting

We manage and assess our business based on our performance on contracts and programs (typically larger contracts or two or more closely-related contracts). We recognize sales from our portfolio of long-term contracts as control is transferred to the customer, primarily over time on a cost-to-cost basis (cost incurred relative to costs estimated at completion). As a result, sales tend to fluctuate in concert with costs incurred across our large portfolio of contracts. Due to the applicable FAR and CAS requirements that govern our U.S. government business, most types of costs are allocable to U.S. government contracts. As such, we do not focus on individual cost groupings (such as manufacturing, engineering and design labor, subcontractor, material, overhead and general and administrative (G&A) costs), as much as we do on total contract cost, which is the key driver of our sales and operating income.

In evaluating our operating performance, we primarily focus on changes in sales and operating margin rates. Where applicable, significant fluctuations in operating performance attributable to individual contracts or programs, or changes in a specific cost element across multiple contracts, are described in our analysis. Based on this approach and the nature of our operations, the discussion of results of operations below first focuses on our four segments before distinguishing between products and services. Changes in sales are generally described in terms of volume, while changes in operating margin rates are generally described in terms of performance and/or contract mix. For purposes of this discussion, volume generally refers to increases or decreases in sales or cost from production/service activity levels and performance generally refers to non-volume-related changes in profitability, which are typically described in terms of changes in net EAC adjustments. Contract mix generally refers to changes in the ratio

-29- of contract type and/or life cycle (e.g., cost-type, fixed-price, development, production, and/or sustainment). Contract mix can also refer to differences in the profitability of the programs that drive changes in sales (e.g., sales growth or decreases on programs with accretive or dilutive margin rates).