Compare Stocks

5 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

FER vs ROAD vs ACM vs PWR vs J

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
FER
Ferrovial SE

Engineering & Construction

IndustrialsNASDAQ • NL
Market Cap$48.20B
5Y Perf.+148.7%
ROAD
Construction Partners, Inc.

Engineering & Construction

NASDAQ • US
Market Cap$6.64B
5Y Perf.+566.9%
ACM
Aecom

Engineering & Construction

IndustrialsNYSE • US
Market Cap$9.22B
5Y Perf.+83.9%
PWR
Quanta Services, Inc.

Engineering & Construction

IndustrialsNYSE • US
Market Cap$115.54B
5Y Perf.+1985.0%
J
Jacobs Solutions Inc.

Engineering & Construction

IndustrialsNYSE • US
Market Cap$13.05B
5Y Perf.-6.0%

FER vs ROAD vs ACM vs PWR vs J — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
FER logoFER
ROAD logoROAD
ACM logoACM
PWR logoPWR
J logoJ
IndustryEngineering & ConstructionEngineering & ConstructionEngineering & ConstructionEngineering & ConstructionEngineering & Construction
Market Cap$48.20B$6.64B$9.22B$115.54B$13.05B
Revenue (TTM)$9.35B$3.26B$15.99B$29.99B$13.17B
Net Income (TTM)$3.37B$127M$506M$1.12B$390M
Gross Margin87.0%15.7%7.7%13.6%23.4%
Operating Margin34.9%8.6%6.4%5.8%4.8%
Forward P/E67.4x39.4x11.9x55.0x15.3x
Total Debt$10.73B$1.69B$3.36B$1.19B$2.71B
Cash & Equiv.$4.24B$156M$1.59B$440M$1.24B

FER vs ROAD vs ACM vs PWR vs JLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

FER
ROAD
ACM
PWR
J
StockMay 20May 26Return
Ferrovial SE (FER)100248.7+148.7%
Construction Partne… (ROAD)100666.9+566.9%
Aecom (ACM)100183.9+83.9%
Quanta Services, In… (PWR)1002085.0+1985.0%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: FER vs ROAD vs ACM vs PWR vs J

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: ACM leads in 3 of 7 categories (5-stock set), making it the strongest pick for valuation and capital efficiency and capital preservation and lower volatility. Ferrovial SE is the stronger pick specifically for profitability and margin quality and operational efficiency and capital deployment. ROAD and PWR also each lead in at least one category. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
FER
Ferrovial SE
The Quality Compounder

FER is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.

  • 36.0% margin vs J's 3.0%
  • 12.1% ROA vs J's 3.4%, ROIC 6.1% vs 9.9%
Best for: quality and efficiency
ROAD
Construction Partners, Inc.
The Growth Play

ROAD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and valuation efficiency.

  • Rev growth 54.2%, EPS growth 40.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 29.3%
  • PEG 2.10 vs PWR's 3.19
  • 54.2% revenue growth vs ACM's 0.2%
Best for: growth exposure and valuation efficiency
ACM
Aecom
The Income Pick

ACM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.

  • Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.93, yield 1.4%
  • Lower volatility, beta 0.93, current ratio 1.14x
  • Beta 0.93, yield 1.4%, current ratio 1.14x
  • Lower P/E (11.9x vs 15.3x)
Best for: income & stability and sleep-well-at-night
PWR
Quanta Services, Inc.
The Long-Run Compounder

PWR is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.

  • 32.3% 10Y total return vs ROAD's 8.8%
  • +126.3% vs ACM's -33.1%
Best for: long-term compounding
J
Jacobs Solutions Inc.
The Quality Angle

Among these 5 stocks, J doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.

Best for: industrials exposure
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthROAD logoROAD54.2% revenue growth vs ACM's 0.2%
ValueACM logoACMLower P/E (11.9x vs 15.3x)
Quality / MarginsFER logoFER36.0% margin vs J's 3.0%
Stability / SafetyACM logoACMBeta 0.93 vs ROAD's 1.61, lower leverage
DividendsACM logoACM1.4% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs J's 1.2%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
Momentum (1Y)PWR logoPWR+126.3% vs ACM's -33.1%
Efficiency (ROA)FER logoFER12.1% ROA vs J's 3.4%, ROIC 6.1% vs 9.9%

FER vs ROAD vs ACM vs PWR vs J — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

FERFerrovial SE

Segment breakdown not available.

ROADConstruction Partners, Inc.

Segment breakdown not available.

ACMAecom
FY 2025
Americas Segment
77.6%$12.5B
International Segment
22.4%$3.6B
Aecom Capital
0.0%$500,000
PWRQuanta Services, Inc.
FY 2025
Electric Power Infrastructure
80.8%$23.0B
Underground Utility and Infrastructure Solutions
19.2%$5.5B
JJacobs Solutions Inc.
FY 2025
Infrastructure & Advanced Facilities
89.5%$10.8B
PA Consulting
10.5%$1.3B

FER vs ROAD vs ACM vs PWR vs J — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLPWRLAGGINGJ

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

FER leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

PWR is the larger business by revenue, generating $30.0B annually — 9.2x ROAD's $3.3B. FER is the more profitable business, keeping 36.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to J's 3.0%. On growth, ROAD holds the edge at +34.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricFER logoFERFerrovial SEROAD logoROADConstruction Part…ACM logoACMAecomPWR logoPWRQuanta Services, …J logoJJacobs Solutions …
RevenueTrailing 12 months$9.3B$3.3B$16.0B$30.0B$13.2B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$3.6B$405M$1.2B$2.4B$865M
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$3.4B$127M$506M$1.1B$390M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$925M$191M$410M$1.7B$484M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+87.0%+15.7%+7.7%+13.6%+23.4%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+34.9%+8.6%+6.4%+5.8%+4.8%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+36.0%+3.9%+3.2%+3.7%+3.0%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+9.9%+5.9%+2.6%+5.6%+3.7%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-6.4%+34.6%+0.8%+26.3%+27.0%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+32.1%+111.4%+28.7%+51.0%-7.1%
FER leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

ACM leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 16.9x trailing earnings, ACM trades at a 85% valuation discount to PWR's 113.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ROAD offers better value at 3.43x vs PWR's 6.57x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricFER logoFERFerrovial SEROAD logoROADConstruction Part…ACM logoACMAecomPWR logoPWRQuanta Services, …J logoJJacobs Solutions …
Market CapShares × price$48.2B$6.6B$9.2B$115.5B$13.0B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$55.8B$8.2B$11.0B$116.3B$14.5B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS46.70x64.16x16.94x113.23x46.43x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.67.35x39.42x11.92x55.03x15.27x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate3.43x6.57x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple28.72x21.06x9.14x46.85x13.19x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue4.30x2.36x0.57x4.08x1.08x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share5.40x7.17x3.53x12.94x2.85x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF23.80x43.30x13.46x71.29x21.48x
ACM leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

PWR leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

FER delivers a 42.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $43 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 ROAD's 1.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FER scores 7/9 vs PWR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricFER logoFERFerrovial SEROAD logoROADConstruction Part…ACM logoACMAecomPWR logoPWRQuanta Services, …J logoJJacobs Solutions …
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+42.7%+13.7%+19.6%+13.0%+9.1%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+12.1%+3.9%+4.2%+4.8%+3.4%
ROICReturn on invested capital+6.1%+10.3%+18.6%+11.8%+9.9%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+5.4%+12.6%+17.2%+11.3%+11.1%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–975747
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage1.40x1.85x1.25x0.13x0.58x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$6.5B$1.5B$1.8B$748M$1.5B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$4.2B$156M$1.6B$440M$1.2B
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$10.7B$1.7B$3.4B$1.2B$2.7B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense3.81x4.34x5.42x6.27x4.59x
PWR leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

PWR leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in PWR five years ago would be worth $79,737 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,682 for J. Over the past 12 months, PWR leads with a +126.3% total return vs ACM's -33.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PWR at 64.0% vs J's -8.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricFER logoFERFerrovial SEROAD logoROADConstruction Part…ACM logoACMAecomPWR logoPWRQuanta Services, …J logoJJacobs Solutions …
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+3.6%+5.3%-25.4%+75.2%-18.1%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+35.7%+19.2%-33.1%+126.3%-25.7%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+133.5%+315.8%-6.6%+341.1%-24.3%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+134.3%+274.4%+13.0%+697.4%-23.2%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+244.3%+875.6%+130.3%+3228.3%-21.5%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+32.7%+60.8%-2.2%+64.0%-8.9%
PWR leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — ACM and PWR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

ACM is the less volatile stock with a 0.93 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ROAD's 1.61 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PWR currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs ACM's 52.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricFER logoFERFerrovial SEROAD logoROADConstruction Part…ACM logoACMAecomPWR logoPWRQuanta Services, …J logoJJacobs Solutions …
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5000.95x1.61x0.93x1.37x1.09x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$74.79$151.00$135.52$788.72$154.72
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$49.56$93.22$67.64$320.56$105.68
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+89.4%+78.2%+52.6%+97.6%+71.4%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10046.250.424.872.836.3
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded1.3M512K1.1M1.1M937K
Evenly matched — ACM and PWR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Evenly matched — ACM and J each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: FER as "Buy", ROAD as "Buy", ACM as "Buy", PWR as "Buy", J as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 61.1% upside for ACM (target: $115) vs -13.6% for PWR (target: $665). For income investors, ACM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.41% vs FER's 0.38%.

MetricFER logoFERFerrovial SEROAD logoROADConstruction Part…ACM logoACMAecomPWR logoPWRQuanta Services, …J logoJJacobs Solutions …
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellBuyBuyBuyBuyBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$70.93$146.33$114.88$665.29$155.57
# AnalystsCovering analysts29253538
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+0.4%+1.4%+0.1%+1.2%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises104710
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$0.22$1.00$0.40$1.27
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap+1.2%+0.4%+4.2%+0.1%+5.8%
Evenly matched — ACM and J each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

PWR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). FER leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.

Best OverallQuanta Services, Inc. (PWR)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

FER vs ROAD vs ACM vs PWR vs J: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J a better buy right now?

For growth investors, Construction Partners, Inc.

(ROAD) is the stronger pick with 54. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 2% for Aecom (ACM). Aecom (ACM) offers the better valuation at 16. 9x trailing P/E (11. 9x 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J?

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

9x versus Quanta Services, Inc. at 113. 2x. 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: Construction Partners, Inc. wins at 2. 10x versus Quanta Services, Inc. 's 3. 19x.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J?

Over the past 5 years, Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) delivered a total return of +697. 4%, compared to -23. 2% for Jacobs Solutions Inc. (J). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PWR returned +32. 3% versus J's -21. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J?

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

93β versus Construction Partners, Inc. 's 1. 61β — meaning ROAD is approximately 73% 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 185% for Construction Partners, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Construction Partners, Inc.

(ROAD) is pulling ahead at 54. 2% versus 0. 2% for Aecom (ACM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Aecom grew EPS 42. 7% year-over-year, compared to -72. 3% for Ferrovial SE. Over a 3-year CAGR, ROAD leads at 29. 3% 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J?

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

2% net margin versus 2. 4% for Jacobs Solutions 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 5. 8% for PWR. 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.

07

Is FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J 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, Construction Partners, Inc. (ROAD) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 10x versus Quanta Services, Inc. 's 3. 19x. 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 67. 4x for Ferrovial SE — 55. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ACM: 61. 1% to $114. 88.

08

Which pays a better dividend — FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J?

In this comparison, ACM (1.

4% yield), J (1. 2% yield), FER (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. ROAD, PWR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

09

Is FER or ROAD or ACM or PWR or J 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.

93), 1. 4% yield, +130. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACM: +130. 3%, PWR: +32. 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.

10

What are the main differences between FER and ROAD and ACM and PWR and J?

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; ROAD is a small-cap high-growth stock; ACM is a small-cap deep-value stock; PWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; J is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. ACM, J pay a dividend while FER, ROAD, 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.

Stocks Like

FER

Quality Mega-Cap Compounder

  • Sector: Industrials
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 21%
  • Dividend Yield > 0.5%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

ROAD

High-Growth Disruptor

  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 17%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

ACM

Stable Dividend Mega-Cap

  • Sector: Industrials
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Dividend Yield > 0.5%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

PWR

High-Growth Disruptor

  • Sector: Industrials
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 13%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

J

High-Growth Disruptor

  • Sector: Industrials
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 13%
  • Gross Margin > 14%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform FER and ROAD and ACM and PWR and J on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(FER: -6.4% · ROAD: 34.6%)
Net Margin>
%
(FER: 36.0% · ROAD: 3.9%)
P/E Ratio<
x
(FER: 46.7x · ROAD: 64.2x)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.