Head to head
Everus Construction vs Quanta Services
Side-by-side on the measures that matter, with a plain-English read. Full detail: ECG · PWR
ECG
Everus Construction
125.26-5.64%
1-year price shape — +52% over the period
Quant Rating B · 84/100
vs
PWR
Quanta Services
701.07-2.57%
1-year price shape — +66% over the period
Quant Rating B · 87/100
1-year performance, rebased to 100
Quanta Services edges it on the scoreable measures. Quanta Services has the highest Quant Rating (87); Quanta Services has done best over the past year (+66%); Quanta Services pays the highest dividend yield.
| ECG | PWR | |
|---|---|---|
| Snapshot | ||
| Sector | Engineering & Construction | Engineering & Construction |
| Last price | 125.26 | 701.07 |
| Change today | -5.64% | -2.57% |
| 1-year return | +51.6% | +66.4% |
| Market cap | $6.40B | $105.40B |
| 52-week range | 78.14 – 171.58 | 404.19 – 788.49 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E (TTM) | 25.15 | 80.21 |
| P/E percentile, own 5-yr range | 59th | 91st |
| P/B | 8.27 | 10.94 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.06% |
| Profitability & growth | ||
| EPS (TTM) | 3.95 | 6.80 |
| Net profit (TTM) | $201.70M | $1.02B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.27B | $32.91B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | +33.7% | +41.1% |
| Gross margin | 13.0% | 15.5% |
| Operating margin | 7.8% | 6.1% |
| Net margin | 6.0% | 4.0% |
| Free cash flow (TTM) | $250.37M | $2.39B |
| Ownership & sentiment | ||
| Institutional ownership | 86.6% | 91.5% |
| Insider activity (12mo) | 40 buy / 10 sell | 25 buy / 25 sell |
| Short interest (% of float) | 3.5% | 2.1% |
| Analyst consensus | 83% buy / 17% hold (6) | 87% buy / 13% hold (15) |
| Analyst price target | $176 (+41%) | $798 (+14%) |
| StockVane view | ||
| StockVane Quant Rating | B (84) | B (87) |
| Company | ||
| Employees | 9,400 | 69,500 |
| Founded | 1924 | 1997 |
▲ marks the more favourable stock(s) on measures with a clear direction (lower P/E, higher yield, higher Quant Rating, better 1-year return). Analyst consensus counts each covering institution once, at its most recent rating. Not a recommendation. Quant Rating method: Data & Methodology.