Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. JCI scored 29.7, ECG scored 72.0 — ECG leads.
Compare another set
JCI
Johnson Controls International plc
Building Products & Equipment · Quality-Growth
29.7
$157.44 · $95.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
42.3
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
CheapestECG24.6x
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)
JCI
stronger →← stronger
ECG
65
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
77
56
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
90
7
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
73
ECG is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
JCI
ECG
$1.7bC+
FCF
$250mC
+2.8%C
Rev
+30.5%A
0.70B
D/E
0.47B+
44.5xC
P/E
24.6xB
1.76C+
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
JCI
ECG
383% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
23% above
~46%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~17%/yr
-79%
1-yr DCF upside
-32%
-79%
5-yr DCF upside
-18%
-80%
10-yr DCF upside
+7%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
JCI
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
ECG
Why this score
Durable high returns
Short track record
The companies
JCIJohnson Controls International plc
Building Products & Equipment · $157.44 · beta 1.28
Why now
Building Products & Equipment · market cap $95.4b. Trading near 52-week high of $160.41 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $166.90 (implying +6% upside).
Moat
Net margin 14% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. $95.4b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Trailing P/E 44x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
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 JCI and ECG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 42.3 points in favor of ECG. The widest single difference is Value, where ECG leads by 66.1 points.
ValueJCI 7.2 · ECG 73.3ECG +66.1
GrowthJCI 56.2 · ECG 89.5ECG +33.3
QualityJCI 65.3 · ECG 77.0ECG +11.7
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 JCI the better stock?
ECG scores higher: ECG 72.0, JCI 29.7 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 JCI differ most?
The widest gap is value, where ECG leads by 66 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 JCI 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.