Sterling Infrastructure vs Tutor Perini
STRL and TPC side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How STRL and TPC compare
Sterling Infrastructure is the larger company, worth 1.7 times as much as Tutor Perini ($9.3B against $5.3B).
On earnings, Sterling Infrastructure is cheaper: it trades at 17.1× trailing earnings, against 38.4× for Tutor Perini.
Sterling Infrastructure grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (93.1% versus 22.6% for Tutor Perini).
Sterling Infrastructure keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 12.9% compared with 2.3% at Tutor Perini.
Tutor Perini pays a dividend yielding 0.27%; Sterling Infrastructure does not pay one.
Sterling Infrastructure scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 16 for Tutor Perini), 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 | STRL | TPC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $9.3B | $5.3B |
| Share price | $303.85 | $101.34 |
| Change, 1 year | −21.0% | 58.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 959% | 616% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.48 | 1.24 |
| Employees | 4,400 | 7,400 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 22 (better) | 16 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 17.1× (better) | 38.4× |
| P/S | 2.1× | 0.9× (better) |
| P/B | 6.1× | 4.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.4× (better) | 11.8× |
| P/FCF | 19.7× | 7.9× (better) |
| PEG | 0.44 | – |
| FCF yield | 5.1% | 12.6% (better) |
| Fair value | $404.83 | $66.28 |
| Margin of safety | 24.9% (better) | −52.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 93.1% (better) | 22.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 15.2% (better) | 0.83% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 75.5% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 74.5% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 44.3% (better) | −6.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 23.8% (better) | 11.8% |
| Operating margin | 18.2% (better) | 5.6% |
| Net margin | 12.9% (better) | 2.3% |
| FCF margin | 10.9% (better) | 10.8% |
| Return on equity | 43.3% (better) | 11.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 51.1% (better) | 36.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.06 (better) | 0.31 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.14 | −1.78 |
| Interest coverage | – | 7.4× |
| Current ratio | 1.04 | 1.27 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.43 (better) | 2.26 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.27% |
| Payout ratio | – | 10.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | 1.4% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 1.4% (better) | 0.27% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 86.3% | 80.3% |
| Held by insiders | 2.4% | 10.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$96.3M (better) | −$216M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.7% | 3.9% |
Go deeper
- STRL stock overview
- STRL income statement
- STRL 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.