ACM vs MTZ vs PWR vs J

For growth investors, Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) is the stronger pick with 19. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 2% for Aecom (ACM). Aecom (ACM) offers the better valuation at 16. 6x trailing P/E (11. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Aecom (ACM) a "Buy" — based on 25 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, Aecom (ACM) is the cheapest at 16.

6x versus Quanta Services, Inc. at 112. 6x. On forward P/E, Aecom is actually cheaper at 11. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Quanta Services, Inc. wins at 3. 19x versus MasTec, Inc. 's 16. 08x.

Over the past 5 years, Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) delivered a total return of +710. 7%, compared to -20. 8% for Jacobs Solutions Inc. (J). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PWR returned +31. 8% versus J's -19. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Aecom (ACM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

90β versus MasTec, Inc. 's 1. 62β — meaning MTZ is approximately 79% more volatile than ACM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Quanta Services, Inc. (PWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 125% for Aecom — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) is pulling ahead at 19. 8% versus 0. 2% for Aecom (ACM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MasTec, Inc. grew EPS 146. 1% year-over-year, compared to -62. 3% for Jacobs Solutions Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PWR leads at 18. 4% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 6% net margin versus 2. 4% for Jacobs Solutions Inc. — meaning it keeps 3. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: J leads at 7. 2% versus 4. 6% for MTZ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — J leads at 24. 8%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Quanta Services, Inc. (PWR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 3. 19x versus MasTec, Inc. 's 16. 08x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Aecom (ACM) trades at 11. 8x forward P/E versus 55. 0x for Quanta Services, Inc. — 43. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ACM: 79. 6% to $125. 63.

In this comparison, ACM (1.

4% yield), J (1. 1% yield) pay a dividend. MTZ, PWR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Aecom (ACM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

90), 1. 4% yield, +126. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACM: +126. 9%, PWR: +31. 8%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: ACM is a small-cap deep-value stock; MTZ is a mid-cap high-growth stock; PWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; J is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ACM, J pay a dividend while MTZ, PWR do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.