Engineering & Construction
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
EME vs ETN vs PWR vs ROK vs HON
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Industrial - Machinery
Engineering & Construction
Industrial - Machinery
Conglomerates
EME vs ETN vs PWR vs ROK vs HON — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Engineering & Construction | Industrial - Machinery | Engineering & Construction | Industrial - Machinery | Conglomerates |
| Market Cap | $41.15B | $155.02B | $112.65B | $50.37B | $136.91B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $17.75B | $28.52B | $29.99B | $8.80B | $36.76B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.33B | $3.99B | $1.12B | $1.09B | $4.10B |
| Gross Margin | 19.5% | 36.9% | 13.6% | 52.5% | 36.9% |
| Operating Margin | 9.9% | 18.1% | 5.8% | 19.1% | 14.9% |
| Forward P/E | 31.6x | 30.0x | 57.4x | 36.9x | 20.5x |
| Total Debt | $844M | $11.17B | $1.19B | $3.65B | $34.58B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.11B | $622M | $440M | $468M | $12.49B |
EME vs ETN vs PWR vs ROK vs HON — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| EMCOR Group, Inc. (EME) | 100 | 1454.1 | +1354.1% |
| Eaton Corporation p… (ETN) | 100 | 470.2 | +370.2% |
| Quanta Services, In… (PWR) | 100 | 2032.8 | +1932.8% |
| Rockwell Automation… (ROK) | 100 | 207.4 | +107.4% |
| Honeywell Internati… (HON) | 100 | 148.1 | +48.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EME vs ETN vs PWR vs ROK vs HON
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EME ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.50 vs HON's 11.18
- 14.8% ROA vs PWR's 4.8%, ROIC 46.8% vs 11.8%
ETN is the clearest fit if your priority is quality.
- 14.0% margin vs PWR's 3.7%
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%
- 31.4% 10Y total return vs EME's 18.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.30, Low D/E 13.2%, current ratio 1.14x
- 19.8% revenue growth vs ROK's 1.0%
Among these 5 stocks, ROK doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
HON carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.74, yield 2.1%
- Beta 0.74, yield 2.1%, current ratio 1.32x
- Lower P/E (20.5x vs 36.9x)
- Beta 0.74 vs EME's 1.64
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.8% revenue growth vs ROK's 1.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.5x vs 36.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 14.0% margin vs PWR's 3.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.74 vs EME's 1.64 | |
| Dividends | 2.1% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ETN's 1.0% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +132.1% vs HON's +2.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.8% ROA vs PWR's 4.8%, ROIC 46.8% vs 11.8% |
EME vs ETN vs PWR vs ROK vs HON — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
EME vs ETN vs PWR vs ROK vs HON — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HON leads in 1 of 6 categories
EME leads 1 • PWR leads 1 • ETN leads 0 • ROK leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ETN and PWR and ROK each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HON is the larger business by revenue, generating $36.8B annually — 4.2x ROK's $8.8B. ETN is the more profitable business, keeping 14.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PWR's 3.7%. On growth, PWR holds the edge at +26.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $17.8B | $28.5B | $30.0B | $8.8B | $36.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.9B | $5.9B | $2.4B | $1.9B | $6.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.3B | $4.0B | $1.1B | $1.1B | $4.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.1B | $4.7B | $1.7B | $1.3B | $4.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +19.5% | +36.9% | +13.6% | +52.5% | +36.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.9% | +18.1% | +5.8% | +19.1% | +14.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.5% | +14.0% | +3.7% | +12.4% | +11.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +6.1% | +16.5% | +5.6% | +15.2% | +11.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +19.7% | +16.8% | +26.3% | +11.8% | -6.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +30.0% | -9.4% | +51.0% | +39.6% | -41.9% |
Valuation Metrics
HON leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 29.4x trailing earnings, HON trades at a 73% valuation discount to PWR's 110.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), EME offers better value at 0.51x vs HON's 15.99x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $41.2B | $155.0B | $112.7B | $50.4B | $136.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $40.9B | $165.6B | $113.4B | $53.6B | $159.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 32.78x | 38.17x | 110.40x | 58.45x | 29.36x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 31.57x | 30.00x | 57.40x | 36.93x | 20.52x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.51x | 1.55x | 6.40x | — | 15.99x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.17x | 27.69x | 45.68x | 30.64x | 19.99x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.42x | 5.65x | 3.97x | 6.04x | 3.66x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 11.33x | 7.99x | 12.61x | 13.66x | 9.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 34.60x | 34.67x | 69.50x | 37.09x | 25.39x |
Profitability & Efficiency
EME leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
EME delivers a 38.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $38 in annual profit, vs $13 for PWR. PWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HON's 2.24x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ROK scores 8/9 vs PWR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +38.3% | +20.8% | +13.0% | +29.6% | +23.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +14.8% | +9.0% | +4.8% | +9.7% | +5.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +46.8% | +13.6% | +11.8% | +15.1% | +12.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +40.3% | +16.8% | +11.3% | +18.5% | +12.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 8 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.23x | 0.57x | 0.13x | 0.98x | 2.24x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$268M | $10.5B | $748M | $3.2B | $22.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.1B | $622M | $440M | $468M | $12.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $844M | $11.2B | $1.2B | $3.6B | $34.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 293.56x | 16.38x | 6.27x | 9.06x | 3.92x |
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 $75,108 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,326 for HON. Over the past 12 months, PWR leads with a +132.1% total return vs HON's +2.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EME at 77.3% vs HON's 5.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +44.8% | +22.3% | +70.8% | +12.8% | +10.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +113.1% | +33.2% | +132.1% | +60.2% | +2.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +456.9% | +141.3% | +345.2% | +65.0% | +16.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +640.8% | +182.8% | +651.1% | +74.6% | +3.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1863.2% | +608.7% | +3143.9% | +341.0% | +135.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +77.3% | +34.1% | +64.5% | +18.2% | +5.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EME and HON each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HON is the less volatile stock with a 0.74 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EME's 1.64 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EME currently trades 97.2% from its 52-week high vs HON's 87.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.64x | 1.42x | 1.30x | 1.33x | 0.74x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $950.74 | $435.43 | $788.72 | $463.49 | $248.18 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $427.90 | $296.93 | $315.45 | $277.66 | $186.76 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.2% | +91.7% | +95.2% | +96.7% | +87.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 72.9 | 59.8 | 87.0 | 74.9 | 45.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 359K | 2.5M | 1.1M | 831K | 3.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ETN and HON each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EME as "Buy", ETN as "Buy", PWR as "Buy", ROK as "Hold", HON as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 12.8% upside for HON (target: $244) vs -13.8% for PWR (target: $647). For income investors, HON offers the higher dividend yield at 2.14% vs EME's 0.11%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $931.50 | $379.78 | $647.23 | $436.56 | $243.83 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 39 | 35 | 39 | 28 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.1% | +1.0% | +0.1% | +1.2% | +2.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 6 | 24 | 7 | 20 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.00 | $4.17 | $0.40 | $5.23 | $4.63 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | +1.2% | +0.1% | +0.8% | +2.8% |
HON leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). EME leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
EME vs ETN vs PWR vs ROK vs HON: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON 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 1. 0% for Rockwell Automation, Inc. (ROK). Honeywell International Inc. (HON) offers the better valuation at 29. 4x trailing P/E (20. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate EMCOR Group, Inc. (EME) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON?
On trailing P/E, Honeywell International Inc.
(HON) is the cheapest at 29. 4x versus Quanta Services, Inc. at 110. 4x. On forward P/E, Honeywell International Inc. is actually cheaper at 20. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: EMCOR Group, Inc. wins at 0. 50x versus Honeywell International Inc. 's 11. 18x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON?
Over the past 5 years, Quanta Services, Inc.
(PWR) delivered a total return of +651. 1%, compared to +3. 3% for Honeywell International Inc. (HON). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PWR returned +31. 4% versus HON's +135. 1%. 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 — EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Honeywell International Inc.
(HON) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 74β versus EMCOR Group, Inc. 's 1. 64β — meaning EME is approximately 121% more volatile than HON relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Quanta Services, Inc. (PWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 2% for Honeywell International Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Quanta Services, Inc.
(PWR) is pulling ahead at 19. 8% versus 1. 0% for Rockwell Automation, Inc. (ROK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: EMCOR Group, Inc. grew EPS 31. 0% year-over-year, compared to -15. 5% for Honeywell International 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 — EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON?
Eaton Corporation plc (ETN) is the more profitable company, earning 14.
9% net margin versus 3. 6% for Quanta Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 14. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ETN leads at 19. 1% versus 5. 8% for PWR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ROK leads at 48. 1%, 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 EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON 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, EMCOR Group, Inc. (EME) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 50x versus Honeywell International Inc. 's 11. 18x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Honeywell International Inc. (HON) trades at 20. 5x forward P/E versus 57. 4x for Quanta Services, Inc. — 36. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HON: 12. 8% to $243. 83.
08Which pays a better dividend — EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON?
In this comparison, HON (2.
1% yield), ROK (1. 2% yield), ETN (1. 0% yield), EME (0. 1% yield) pay a dividend. PWR does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EME or ETN or PWR or ROK or HON better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Honeywell International Inc.
(HON) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 74), 2. 1% yield, +135. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (HON: +135. 1%, PWR: +31. 4%), 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 EME and ETN and PWR and ROK and HON?
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: EME is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ETN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ROK is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; HON is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ETN, ROK, HON pay a dividend while EME, 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.
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.