Granite Construction vs Tutor Perini
GVA and TPC side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How GVA and TPC compare
Granite Construction and Tutor Perini are about the same size, with market caps of $5.6B and $5.3B.
Granite Construction grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (25.1% versus 22.6% for Tutor Perini).
Tutor Perini keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.3% compared with −5.0% at Granite Construction.
Both pay dividends: Granite Construction yields 0.41% and Tutor Perini 0.27%.
Tutor Perini scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 11 for Granite Construction), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | GVA | TPC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.6B | $5.3B |
| Share price | $126.40 | $101.34 |
| Change, 1 year | 26.2% | 58.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 197% | 616% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.98 | 1.24 |
| Employees | 2,500 | 7,400 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 38.4× |
| P/S | 1.1× | 0.9× (better) |
| P/B | 5.9× | 4.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.5× (better) | 11.8× |
| P/FCF | 12.6× | 7.9× (better) |
| FCF yield | 7.9% | 12.6% (better) |
| Fair value | $120.92 | $66.28 |
| Margin of safety | −4.5% (better) | −52.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 25.1% (better) | 22.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.4% (better) | 0.83% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −245% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −284% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −6.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 16.1% (better) | 11.8% |
| Operating margin | 7.5% (better) | 5.6% |
| Net margin | −5.0% | 2.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 8.4% | 10.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | −25.2% | 11.3% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 15.9% | 36.0% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.64 | 0.31 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.80 (better) | −1.78 |
| Interest coverage | 1.1× | 7.4× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.11 | 1.27 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.64 (better) | 2.26 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.41% (better) | 0.27% |
| Payout ratio | – | 10.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 0.00% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.5% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.9% (better) | 0.27% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 112% | 80.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.80% | 10.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.6M (better) | −$216M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.8% | 3.9% |
Go deeper
- GVA stock overview
- GVA income statement
- GVA valuation and score
- TPC stock overview
- TPC income statement
- TPC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.