Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ECG scored 72.0, FLR scored 13.6 — ECG leads.
Compare another set
ECG
Everus Construction Group, Inc.
Engineering & Construction · Quality-Growth
72
$122.44 · $6.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
58.4
ECG leads
FLR
Fluor Corporation
Engineering & Construction · Quality-Growth
13.6
$50.68 · $6.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthECG+30.5%
Strongest balance sheetFLR0.38
Highest qualityECG77 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ECG
stronger →← stronger
FLR
77
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
28
90
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
14
73
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
6
ECG is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ECG
FLR
$250mC
FCF
-$330mF
+30.5%A
Rev
-5.0%D+
0.47B+
D/E
0.38B+
24.6xB
P/E
—
1.33B
PEG
1.10B+
—
P/S
0.4xA
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
ECG
FLR
23% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
—
~17%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
—
-32%
1-yr DCF upside
—
-18%
5-yr DCF upside
—
+7%
10-yr DCF upside
—
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ECG
Why this score
Durable high returns
Short track record
FLR
Why this score
Buying back stock
Earnings outpace cash
The companies
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.
FLRFluor Corporation
Engineering & Construction · $50.68 · beta 1.28
Why now
Engineering & Construction · market cap $6.8b. 13% off the 52-week high of $58.35. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $61.69 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$330m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Currently unprofitable (margin -12.8%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. ROE -45% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
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 ECG and FLR diverge
On the headline score the gap is 58.4 points in favor of ECG. The widest single difference is Growth, where ECG leads by 75.4 points.
GrowthECG 89.5 · FLR 14.1ECG +75.4
ValueECG 73.3 · FLR 6.3ECG +67.0
QualityECG 77.0 · FLR 28.3ECG +48.7
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 FLR the better stock?
ECG scores higher: ECG 72.0, FLR 13.6 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 FLR differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where ECG leads by 75 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 FLR 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.