Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ACM scored 51.9, ECG scored 72.0 — ECG leads.
Compare another set
ACM
AECOM
Engineering & Construction · Quality-Growth
51.9
$59.28 · $7.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
20.1
ECG leads
ECG
Everus Construction Group, Inc.
Engineering & Construction · Quality-Growth
72
$122.44 · $6.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestACM20.9x
Fastest growthECG+30.5%
Strongest balance sheetECG0.47
Highest qualityECG77 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ACM
stronger →← stronger
ECG
64
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
77
36
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
90
61
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
73
ECG is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ACM
ECG
$203mC
FCF
$250mC
-4.2%D+
Rev
+30.5%A
1.39C
D/E
0.47B+
20.9xB+
P/E
24.6xB
0.65A-
PEG
1.33B
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ACM
ECG
137% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
23% above
~26%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~17%/yr
-58%
1-yr DCF upside
-32%
-58%
5-yr DCF upside
-18%
-58%
10-yr DCF upside
+7%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ACM
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
ECG
Why this score
Durable high returns
Short track record
The companies
ACMAECOM
Engineering & Construction · $59.28 · beta 0.93
Why now
Engineering & Construction · market cap $7.6b. Down 56% from 52-week high of $135.52 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.65 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $85.83 (implying +45% upside).
Moat
ROE 13% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Down 56% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 1.9% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
ECGEverus Construction Group, Inc.
Engineering & Construction · $122.44
Why now
Engineering & Construction · market cap $6.2b. Down 29% from 52-week high of $171.58 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +31% — in hypergrowth territory. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $176.00 (implying +44% upside).
Moat
ROE 33% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 98% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where ACM and ECG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 20.1 points in favor of ECG. The widest single difference is Growth, where ECG leads by 53.5 points.
GrowthACM 36.0 · ECG 89.5ECG +53.5
QualityACM 63.8 · ECG 77.0ECG +13.2
ValueACM 60.7 · ECG 73.3ECG +12.6
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is ECG or ACM the better stock?
ECG scores higher: ECG 72.0, ACM 51.9 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do ECG and ACM differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where ECG leads by 54 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ECG leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are ECG and ACM scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.