COMPARE · Data as of August 12, 2026
EXPO vs FLR
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EXPO scored 75.8, FLR scored 27.9 — EXPO leads.
Compare another set
EXPO
Exponent, Inc.
75.8
$67.64 · $3.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
47.9
EXPO leads
FLR
Fluor Corporation
27.9
$52.03 · $7.0B
fundamentals as of
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
EXPO
stronger →← stronger
FLR
92
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
28
84
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
14
56
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
55
EXPO is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
EXPO
FLR
$109mC
FCF
-$330mF
+12.8%B+
Rev
-4.8%D+
0.28A-
D/E
0.38B+
30.6xB
P/E
—
2.03C
PEG
1.10B+
—
P/S
0.4xA
Winner per row is the stronger grade in our model; a tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
EXPO
FLR
20% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
—
~13%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
—
-27%
1-yr DCF upside
—
-17%
5-yr DCF upside
—
+1%
10-yr DCF upside
—
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
EXPO
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
FLR
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Earnings outpace cash
The companies
EXPOExponent, Inc.
Why now
Engineering & Construction · market cap $3.2b. 17% off the 52-week high of $81.95. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 3 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $84.00 (implying +24% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 39% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 97% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 31x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
FLRFluor Corporation
Why now
Engineering & Construction · market cap $7.0b. 10% off the 52-week high of $57.93. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $60.69 (implying +17% 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 -74% 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 EXPO and FLR diverge
On the headline score the gap is 47.9 points in favour of EXPO. The widest single difference is Growth, where EXPO leads by 70.3 points.
- GrowthEXPO 84.4 · FLR 14.1EXPO +70.3
- QualityEXPO 92.2 · FLR 27.9EXPO +64.3
- ValueEXPO 56.0 · FLR 55.3level
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.