Engineering & Construction
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FLR 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
FLR 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 | $7.87B | $33.13B | $114.91B | $13.48B | $7.09B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $15.19B | $15.28B | $29.99B | $13.17B | $3.82B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $350M | $459M | $1.12B | $390M | $142M |
| Gross Margin | -1.6% | 12.1% | 13.6% | 23.4% | 11.9% |
| Operating Margin | -2.5% | 5.6% | 5.8% | 4.8% | 5.1% |
| Forward P/E | 16.2x | 47.7x | 55.0x | 15.8x | 41.9x |
| Total Debt | $1.07B | $2.80B | $1.19B | $2.71B | $104M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.13B | $396M | $440M | $1.24B | $150M |
FLR 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fluor Corporation (FLR) | 100 | 385.3 | +285.3% |
| MasTec, Inc. (MTZ) | 100 | 1073.6 | +973.6% |
| Quanta Services, In… (PWR) | 100 | 2073.7 | +1973.7% |
| MYR Group Inc. (MYRG) | 100 | 1580.2 | +1480.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FLR vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FLR lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, MTZ doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
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%
- 31.8% 10Y total return vs MTZ's 18.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.32, Low D/E 13.2%, current ratio 1.14x
- 19.8% revenue growth vs FLR's -5.0%
J carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 1.08, yield 1.1%
- Beta 1.08, yield 1.1%, current ratio 1.30x
- Lower P/E (15.8x vs 55.0x)
- Beta 1.08 vs FLR's 1.87
MYRG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 2.51 vs MTZ's 16.08
- +184.9% vs J's -23.3%
- 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 FLR's -5.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.8x vs 55.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.7% margin vs FLR's 2.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.08 vs FLR's 1.87 | |
| Dividends | 1.1% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs PWR's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +184.9% vs J's -23.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.7% ROA vs J's 3.4%, ROIC 18.3% vs 9.9% |
FLR vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FLR 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
MYRG leads in 1 of 6 categories
J leads 1 • FLR leads 0 • MTZ leads 0 • PWR leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — MTZ and PWR each lead in 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 2.3% (FLR). On growth, MTZ holds the edge at +34.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $15.2B | $15.3B | $30.0B | $13.2B | $3.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$327M | $1.2B | $2.4B | $865M | $261M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $350M | $459M | $1.1B | $390M | $142M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$151M | $179M | $1.7B | $484M | $231M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -1.6% | +12.1% | +13.6% | +23.4% | +11.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.5% | +5.6% | +5.8% | +4.8% | +5.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +2.3% | +3.0% | +3.7% | +3.0% | +3.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -1.0% | +1.2% | +5.6% | +3.7% | +6.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.0% | +34.5% | +26.3% | +27.0% | +20.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +100.0% | +4.9% | +51.0% | -7.1% | +106.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — FLR and J each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 48.0x trailing earnings, J trades at a 57% valuation discount to PWR's 112.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MYRG offers better value at 3.62x vs MTZ's 27.92x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $7.9B | $33.1B | $114.9B | $13.5B | $7.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.8B | $35.5B | $115.7B | $15.0B | $7.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -144.29x | 82.90x | 112.62x | 47.96x | 60.46x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.24x | 47.75x | 55.00x | 15.77x | 41.92x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 27.92x | 6.53x | — | 3.62x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 32.91x | 46.59x | 13.58x | 30.74x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.51x | 2.32x | 4.05x | 1.12x | 1.94x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.40x | 9.92x | 12.87x | 2.94x | 10.84x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 115.95x | 70.90x | 22.19x | 30.53x |
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 $8 for FLR. PWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MTZ's 0.84x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MTZ scores 8/9 vs FLR's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.0% | +14.2% | +13.0% | +9.1% | +22.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.6% | +4.7% | +4.8% | +3.4% | +8.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -12.2% | +8.9% | +11.8% | +9.9% | +18.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -6.6% | +10.2% | +11.3% | +11.1% | +19.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 8 | 4 | 7 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.33x | 0.84x | 0.13x | 0.58x | 0.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$1.1B | $2.4B | $748M | $1.5B | -$47M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.1B | $396M | $440M | $1.2B | $150M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.1B | $2.8B | $1.2B | $2.7B | $104M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -16.30x | 4.37x | 6.27x | 4.59x | 39.49x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — MTZ and PWR and MYRG each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PWR five years ago would be worth $81,072 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,924 for J. Over the past 12 months, MYRG leads with a +184.9% total return vs J's -23.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MTZ at 64.2% vs J's -7.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.3% | +84.6% | +74.2% | -15.4% | +100.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +19.2% | +175.2% | +130.2% | -23.3% | +184.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +73.2% | +342.5% | +341.2% | -21.9% | +239.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +88.1% | +270.3% | +710.7% | -20.8% | +483.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -6.7% | +1827.1% | +3180.6% | -19.1% | +1795.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +20.1% | +64.2% | +64.0% | -7.9% | +50.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PWR and J each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
J is the less volatile stock with a 1.08 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FLR's 1.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PWR currently trades 97.1% from its 52-week high vs J's 73.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.87x | 1.62x | 1.32x | 1.08x | 1.65x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $57.50 | $441.43 | $788.72 | $154.72 | $475.39 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $37.04 | $145.46 | $320.56 | $114.14 | $154.55 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +77.8% | +95.2% | +97.1% | +73.8% | +95.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.1 | 67.0 | 76.0 | 35.3 | 73.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.5M | 903K | 1.1M | 845K | 294K |
Analyst Outlook
J leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FLR as "Buy", MTZ as "Buy", PWR as "Buy", J as "Buy", MYRG as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 36.3% upside for J (target: $156) vs -13.1% for PWR (target: $665). J is the only dividend payer here at 1.12% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $56.00 | $406.40 | $665.29 | $155.57 | $412.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 28 | 36 | 35 | 38 | 21 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.1% | +1.1% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 2 | 7 | 10 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.40 | $1.27 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +9.6% | +0.2% | +0.1% | +5.6% | +1.1% |
MYRG leads in 1 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency). J leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 4 tied.
FLR vs MTZ vs PWR vs J vs MYRG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FLR 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 -5. 0% for Fluor Corporation (FLR). Jacobs Solutions Inc. (J) offers the better valuation at 48. 0x trailing P/E (15. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fluor Corporation (FLR) a "Buy" — based on 28 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 — FLR or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
On trailing P/E, Jacobs Solutions Inc.
(J) is the cheapest at 48. 0x versus Quanta Services, Inc. at 112. 6x. On forward P/E, Jacobs Solutions Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: MYR Group Inc. wins at 2. 51x versus MasTec, Inc. 's 16. 08x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FLR or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
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.
04Which is safer — FLR or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Jacobs Solutions Inc.
(J) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 08β versus Fluor Corporation's 1. 87β — meaning FLR is approximately 73% more volatile than J relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Quanta Services, Inc. (PWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 84% for MasTec, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FLR 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 -5. 0% for Fluor Corporation (FLR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MYR Group Inc. grew EPS 311. 5% year-over-year, compared to -102. 5% for Fluor Corporation. 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 — FLR or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
Quanta Services, Inc.
(PWR) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 6% net margin versus -0. 3% for Fluor Corporation — 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 -2. 3% for FLR. 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 FLR 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. 51x versus MasTec, Inc. 's 16. 08x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Jacobs Solutions Inc. (J) trades at 15. 8x forward P/E versus 55. 0x for Quanta Services, Inc. — 39. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for J: 36. 3% to $155. 57.
08Which pays a better dividend — FLR or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG?
In this comparison, J (1.
1% yield) pays a dividend. FLR, MTZ, PWR, MYRG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is FLR or MTZ or PWR or J or MYRG better for a retirement portfolio?
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 (+1827% 10Y return). Fluor Corporation (FLR) carries a higher beta of 1. 87 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MTZ: +1827%, FLR: -6. 7%), 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 FLR 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: FLR is a small-cap quality compounder 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. J pays a dividend while FLR, 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.