Fluor vs Jacobs Solutions
FLR and J side by side, both in heavy construction other than building construction contractors. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FLR and J compare
Jacobs Solutions is the larger company, worth 2.8 times as much as Fluor ($18.6B against $6.6B).
Jacobs Solutions grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (20.1% versus 1.9% for Fluor).
Jacobs Solutions keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.4% compared with −7.2% at Fluor.
Jacobs Solutions pays a dividend yielding 0.88%; Fluor does not pay one.
Fluor scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 8 for Jacobs Solutions), 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 | FLR | J |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.6B | $18.6B |
| Share price | $48.98 | $158.69 |
| Change, 1 year | 7.1% | 2.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 119% | 8.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.07 | 0.85 |
| Employees | – | 43K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 1 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 53.8× |
| P/S | 0.4× (better) | 1.3× |
| P/B | 2.5× (better) | 5.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.2× (better) | 28.4× |
| P/FCF | – | 28.8× |
| FCF yield | −6.5% | 3.5% (better) |
| Fair value | $82.13 | $91.45 |
| Margin of safety | 40.4% (better) | −73.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.9% | 20.1% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −0.36% (better) | −2.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −134% | −31.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −26.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −8.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 3.3% | 22.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 3.2% | 4.6% (better) |
| Net margin | −7.2% | 2.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | −2.7% | 4.5% (better) |
| Return on equity | −29.4% | 9.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 25.3% (better) | 7.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.41 (better) | 1.10 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −3.55 | 3.26 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 12.3× (better) | 3.9× |
| Current ratio | 1.83 (better) | 1.29 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.24 (better) | 2.93 |
| Piotroski F-score | 2 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.88% |
| Payout ratio | – | 47.8% |
| Buyback yield | 23.0% (better) | 3.7% |
| Shareholder yield | 23.0% (better) | 4.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.1% | 92.2% |
| Held by insiders | 1.8% | 0.63% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.0M | −$2.2M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.5% | 3.5% |
Go deeper
- FLR stock overview
- FLR income statement
- FLR valuation and score
- J stock overview
- J income statement
- J valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.