FER vs MTZ

For growth investors, MasTec, Inc.

(MTZ) is the stronger pick with 16. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 2% for Ferrovial SE (FER). Ferrovial SE (FER) offers the better valuation at 46. 7x trailing P/E (67. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ferrovial SE (FER) a "Buy" — based on 2 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, Ferrovial SE (FER) is the cheapest at 46.

7x versus MasTec, Inc. at 81. 8x. On forward P/E, MasTec, Inc. is actually cheaper at 47. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, MasTec, Inc.

(MTZ) delivered a total return of +245. 3%, compared to +134. 3% for Ferrovial SE (FER). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MTZ returned +1766% versus FER's +244. 3%. 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), Ferrovial SE (FER) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

95β versus MasTec, Inc. 's 1. 70β — meaning MTZ is approximately 80% more volatile than FER relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, MasTec, Inc. (MTZ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 84% versus 140% for Ferrovial SE — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), MasTec, Inc.

(MTZ) is pulling ahead at 16. 2% versus 5. 2% for Ferrovial SE (FER). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MasTec, Inc. grew EPS 146. 1% year-over-year, compared to -72. 3% for Ferrovial SE. Over a 3-year CAGR, MTZ leads at 13. 5% 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.

Ferrovial SE (FER) is the more profitable company, earning 9.

2% net margin versus 2. 8% for MasTec, Inc. — meaning it keeps 9. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FER leads at 12. 2% versus 4. 6% for MTZ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FER leads at 88. 3%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, MasTec, Inc.

(MTZ) trades at 47. 1x forward P/E versus 67. 4x for Ferrovial SE — 20. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FER: 6. 0% to $70. 93.

In this comparison, FER (0.

4% yield) pays a dividend. MTZ does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, MasTec, Inc.

(MTZ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1766% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MTZ: +1766%, FER: +244. 3%), 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: FER is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MTZ is a mid-cap high-growth stock. 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.