Dycom Industries vs Tutor Perini
DY and TPC side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How DY and TPC compare
Dycom Industries is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Tutor Perini ($6.9B against $5.3B).
On earnings, Dycom Industries is cheaper: it trades at 20.7× trailing earnings, against 38.4× for Tutor Perini.
Dycom Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (37.8% versus 22.6% for Tutor Perini).
Dycom Industries keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.8% compared with 2.3% at Tutor Perini.
Tutor Perini pays a dividend yielding 0.27%; Dycom Industries does not pay one.
Tutor Perini scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 14 for Dycom Industries), 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 | DY | TPC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.9B | $5.3B |
| Share price | $228.02 | $101.34 |
| Change, 1 year | −22.3% | 58.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 169% | 616% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.98 | 1.24 |
| Employees | 20K | 7,400 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 4 | 4 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.7× (better) | 38.4× |
| P/S | 1.0× | 0.9× (better) |
| P/B | 3.3× (better) | 4.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 11.8× |
| P/FCF | 14.7× | 7.9× (better) |
| PEG | 0.79 | – |
| FCF yield | 6.8% | 12.6% (better) |
| Fair value | $284.48 | $66.28 |
| Margin of safety | 19.8% (better) | −52.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 37.8% (better) | 22.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.6% (better) | 0.83% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 26.3% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 23.5% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 55.0% (better) | −6.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.5% (better) | 11.8% |
| Operating margin | – | 5.6% |
| Net margin | 4.8% (better) | 2.3% |
| FCF margin | 6.8% | 10.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | 19.2% (better) | 11.3% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 36.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.37 | 0.31 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −1.78 |
| Interest coverage | – | 7.4× |
| Current ratio | 2.35 (better) | 1.27 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.65 (better) | 2.26 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.27% |
| Payout ratio | – | 10.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | 0.52% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.52% (better) | 0.27% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 93.0% | 80.3% |
| Held by insiders | 1.4% | 10.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$708K (better) | −$216M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.3% | 3.9% |
Go deeper
- DY stock overview
- DY income statement
- DY valuation and score
- TPC stock overview
- TPC income statement
- TPC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.