MTZ vs PWR

For growth investors, Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) is the stronger pick with 19. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 16. 2% for MasTec, Inc. (MTZ). MasTec, Inc. (MTZ) offers the better valuation at 85. 5x trailing P/E (51. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MasTec, Inc. (MTZ) a "Buy" — based on 36 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, MasTec, Inc.

(MTZ) is the cheapest at 85. 5x versus Quanta Services, Inc. at 115. 5x. On forward P/E, MasTec, Inc. is actually cheaper at 51. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Quanta Services, Inc. wins at 3. 48x versus MasTec, Inc. 's 17. 21x.

Over the past 5 years, Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) delivered a total return of +698. 2%, compared to +296. 2% for MasTec, Inc. (MTZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PWR returned +32. 3% versus MTZ's +1840%. 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), Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 30β versus MasTec, Inc. 's 1. 64β — meaning MTZ is approximately 26% more volatile than PWR 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.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) is pulling ahead at 19. 8% versus 16. 2% for MasTec, Inc. (MTZ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: MasTec, Inc. grew EPS 146. 1% year-over-year, compared to 12. 8% for Quanta Services, 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.

Quanta Services, Inc.

(PWR) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 6% net margin versus 2. 8% for MasTec, Inc. — meaning it keeps 3. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PWR leads at 5. 8% versus 4. 6% for MTZ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PWR leads at 13. 0%, 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.

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, Quanta Services, Inc. (PWR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 3. 48x versus MasTec, Inc. 's 17. 21x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, MasTec, Inc. (MTZ) trades at 51. 1x forward P/E versus 60. 0x for Quanta Services, Inc. — 8. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PWR: -17. 6% to $647. 23.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than 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 (+1840% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MTZ: +1840%, 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.

Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

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.