Engineering & Construction
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ACM vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Engineering & Construction
Engineering & Construction
Engineering & Construction
Engineering & Construction
ACM vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Engineering & Construction | Engineering & Construction | Engineering & Construction | Engineering & Construction | Engineering & Construction |
| Market Cap | $9.12B | $33.41B | $116.10B | $12.67B | $7.29B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $15.99B | $15.28B | $29.99B | $13.17B | $3.82B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $506M | $459M | $1.12B | $390M | $142M |
| Gross Margin | 7.7% | 12.1% | 13.6% | 23.4% | 11.9% |
| Operating Margin | 6.4% | 5.6% | 5.8% | 4.8% | 5.1% |
| Forward P/E | 11.9x | 48.1x | 55.6x | 14.8x | 43.1x |
| Total Debt | $3.36B | $2.80B | $1.19B | $2.71B | $104M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.59B | $396M | $440M | $1.24B | $150M |
ACM vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aecom (ACM) | 100 | 181.9 | +81.9% |
| MasTec, Inc. (MTZ) | 100 | 1082.5 | +982.5% |
| Quanta Services, In… (PWR) | 100 | 2095.1 | +1995.1% |
| MYR Group Inc. (MYRG) | 100 | 1624.3 | +1524.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ACM vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ACM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.90, yield 1.4%
- Beta 0.90, yield 1.4%, current ratio 1.14x
- Lower P/E (11.9x vs 14.8x)
- Beta 0.90 vs MYRG's 1.65
MTZ lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
PWR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 19.8%, EPS growth 12.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 18.4%
- 33.0% 10Y total return vs MYRG's 19.0%
- 19.8% revenue growth vs ACM's 0.2%
- 3.7% margin vs J's 3.0%
J is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.08, Low D/E 58.2%, current ratio 1.30x
MYRG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 2.58 vs MTZ's 16.22
- +184.8% vs ACM's -32.8%
- 8.7% ROA vs J's 3.4%, ROIC 18.3% vs 9.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.8% revenue growth vs ACM's 0.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.9x vs 14.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.7% margin vs J's 3.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.90 vs MYRG's 1.65 | |
| Dividends | 1.4% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs J's 1.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +184.8% vs ACM's -32.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.7% ROA vs J's 3.4%, ROIC 18.3% vs 9.9% |
ACM vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ACM vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MTZ leads in 1 of 6 categories
ACM leads 1 • MYRG leads 1 • PWR leads 1 • J leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MTZ leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PWR is the larger business by revenue, generating $30.0B annually — 7.8x MYRG's $3.8B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 3.7% (PWR) to 3.0% (J). On growth, MTZ holds the edge at +34.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $16.0B | $15.3B | $30.0B | $13.2B | $3.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.2B | $1.2B | $2.4B | $865M | $261M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $506M | $459M | $1.1B | $390M | $142M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $410M | $179M | $1.7B | $484M | $231M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +7.7% | +12.1% | +13.6% | +23.4% | +11.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.4% | +5.6% | +5.8% | +4.8% | +5.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.2% | +3.0% | +3.7% | +3.0% | +3.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.6% | +1.2% | +5.6% | +3.7% | +6.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +0.8% | +34.5% | +26.3% | +27.0% | +20.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +28.7% | +4.9% | +51.0% | -7.1% | +106.2% |
Valuation Metrics
ACM leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.8x trailing earnings, ACM trades at a 85% valuation discount to PWR's 113.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MYRG offers better value at 3.72x vs MTZ's 28.15x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9.1B | $33.4B | $116.1B | $12.7B | $7.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $10.9B | $35.8B | $116.9B | $14.1B | $7.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 16.75x | 83.59x | 113.78x | 45.07x | 62.15x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.91x | 48.15x | 55.57x | 14.82x | 43.09x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 28.15x | 6.60x | — | 3.72x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.06x | 33.17x | 47.07x | 12.84x | 31.60x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.56x | 2.34x | 4.10x | 1.05x | 1.99x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.49x | 10.00x | 13.00x | 2.76x | 11.15x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.31x | 116.92x | 71.63x | 20.85x | 31.38x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MYRG leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MYRG delivers a 22.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $9 for J. PWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ACM's 1.25x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MTZ scores 8/9 vs PWR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +19.6% | +14.2% | +13.0% | +9.1% | +22.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.2% | +4.7% | +4.8% | +3.4% | +8.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +18.6% | +8.9% | +11.8% | +9.9% | +18.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +17.2% | +10.2% | +11.3% | +11.1% | +19.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 7 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.25x | 0.84x | 0.13x | 0.58x | 0.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.8B | $2.4B | $748M | $1.5B | -$47M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.6B | $396M | $440M | $1.2B | $150M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3.4B | $2.8B | $1.2B | $2.7B | $104M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.42x | 4.37x | 6.27x | 4.59x | 39.49x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PWR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PWR five years ago would be worth $80,756 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,467 for J. Over the past 12 months, MYRG leads with a +184.8% total return vs ACM's -32.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PWR at 64.3% vs J's -9.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -26.2% | +86.2% | +76.0% | -20.5% | +106.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -32.8% | +170.4% | +125.3% | -27.9% | +184.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -7.6% | +336.7% | +343.3% | -26.5% | +248.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +10.6% | +262.9% | +707.6% | -25.3% | +483.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +132.8% | +1891.5% | +3295.6% | -23.7% | +1896.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -2.6% | +63.4% | +64.3% | -9.7% | +51.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ACM and MYRG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ACM is the less volatile stock with a 0.90 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MYRG's 1.65 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MYRG currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs ACM's 52.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.90x | 1.62x | 1.32x | 1.08x | 1.65x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $135.52 | $441.43 | $788.72 | $154.72 | $475.39 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $67.64 | $145.46 | $320.56 | $105.68 | $154.55 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +52.0% | +96.0% | +98.1% | +69.3% | +98.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 21.2 | 66.3 | 70.9 | 32.5 | 72.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 899K | 1.1M | 878K | 292K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ACM and J each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ACM as "Buy", MTZ as "Buy", PWR as "Buy", J as "Buy", MYRG as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 78.1% upside for ACM (target: $126) vs -14.0% for PWR (target: $665). For income investors, ACM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.42% vs J's 1.19%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $125.63 | $406.40 | $665.29 | $155.57 | $412.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 25 | 36 | 35 | 38 | 21 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.4% | — | +0.1% | +1.2% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 2 | 7 | 10 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.00 | — | $0.40 | $1.27 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.3% | +0.2% | +0.1% | +6.0% | +1.1% |
MTZ leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). ACM leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
ACM vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG a better buy right now?
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. 8x trailing P/E (11. 9x 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.
02Which has the better valuation — ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
On trailing P/E, Aecom (ACM) is the cheapest at 16.
8x versus Quanta Services, Inc. at 113. 8x. On forward P/E, Aecom is actually cheaper at 11. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: MYR Group Inc. wins at 2. 58x versus MasTec, Inc. 's 16. 22x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
Over the past 5 years, Quanta Services, Inc.
(PWR) delivered a total return of +707. 6%, compared to -25. 3% for Jacobs Solutions Inc. (J). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PWR returned +33. 0% versus J's -23. 7%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Aecom (ACM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
90β versus MYR Group Inc. 's 1. 65β — meaning MYRG is approximately 83% 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.
05Which is growing faster — ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
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: MYR Group Inc. grew EPS 311. 5% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
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. 4% for MYRG. 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.
07Is ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG more undervalued right now?
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, MYR Group Inc. (MYRG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 58x versus MasTec, Inc. 's 16. 22x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Aecom (ACM) trades at 11. 9x forward P/E versus 55. 6x for Quanta Services, Inc. — 43. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ACM: 78. 1% to $125. 63.
08Which pays a better dividend — ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
In this comparison, ACM (1.
4% yield), J (1. 2% yield) pay a dividend. MTZ, PWR, MYRG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ACM or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG better for a retirement portfolio?
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, +132. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACM: +132. 8%, PWR: +33. 0%), 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.
10What are the main differences between ACM and MTZ and PWR and J and MYRG?
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; MYRG is a small-cap quality compounder stock. ACM, J pay a dividend while MTZ, PWR, MYRG 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.