Seek Returns logo

ACM vs. VRT: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

Here’s a clear look at ACM and VRT, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Overview

VRT’s market capitalization of 48.72 billion USD is significantly greater than ACM’s 15.31 billion USD, highlighting its more substantial market valuation.

VRT carries a higher beta at 1.73, indicating it’s more sensitive to market moves, while ACM (beta: 0.97) exhibits greater stability.

SymbolACMVRT
Company NameAecomVertiv Holdings Co
CountryUSUS
SectorIndustrialsIndustrials
IndustryEngineering & ConstructionElectrical Equipment & Parts
CEOW. Troy RuddGiordano Albertazzi
Price115.75 USD127.84 USD
Market Cap15.31 billion USD48.72 billion USD
Beta0.971.73
ExchangeNYSENYSE
IPO DateMay 10, 2007August 2, 2018
ADRNoNo

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of ACM and VRT by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period.

Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

ACM vs. VRT: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Profitability

Return on Equity

ACM

27.52%

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
39.77%
Q3
28.08%
Median
13.64%
Q1
7.13%
Min
-14.48%

ACM’s Return on Equity of 27.52% is on par with the norm for the Engineering & Construction industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

VRT

31.53%

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
40.77%
Q3
24.97%
Median
9.16%
Q1
-21.24%
Min
-83.49%

In the upper quartile for the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry, VRT’s Return on Equity of 31.53% signals a highly effective use of shareholder capital to drive profitability compared to most of its peers.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their ROE against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Return on Invested Capital

ACM

6.55%

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
22.01%
Q3
12.65%
Median
8.09%
Q1
4.79%
Min
-2.53%

ACM’s Return on Invested Capital of 6.55% is in line with the norm for the Engineering & Construction industry, reflecting a standard level of efficiency in generating profits from its capital base.

VRT

14.66%

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
28.65%
Q3
9.59%
Median
4.18%
Q1
-26.21%
Min
-64.66%

In the upper quartile for the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry, VRT’s Return on Invested Capital of 14.66% signifies a highly effective use of its capital to generate profits when compared to its peers.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their ROIC against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin

ACM

3.85%

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
11.23%
Q3
6.47%
Median
3.96%
Q1
2.79%
Min
-2.45%

ACM’s Net Profit Margin of 3.85% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Engineering & Construction industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

VRT

7.92%

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
18.22%
Q3
10.17%
Median
3.30%
Q1
-100.73%
Min
-135.80%

VRT’s Net Profit Margin of 7.92% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin

ACM

5.98%

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
13.74%
Q3
8.50%
Median
6.20%
Q1
4.58%
Min
0.34%

ACM’s Operating Profit Margin of 5.98% is around the midpoint for the Engineering & Construction industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

VRT

17.31%

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
19.88%
Q3
14.79%
Median
7.23%
Q1
-48.45%
Min
-140.29%

An Operating Profit Margin of 17.31% places VRT in the upper quartile for the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry. This signals a strong ability to translate revenue into operating profit, outperforming most of its competitors in core business efficiency.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their Operating Margin against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolACMVRT
Return on Equity (TTM)27.52%31.53%
Return on Assets (TTM)5.24%7.05%
Return on Invested Capital (TTM)6.55%14.66%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)3.85%7.92%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)5.98%17.31%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)7.09%36.32%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio

ACM

--

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
2.02
Q3
1.66
Median
1.38
Q1
1.24
Min
0.94

Current Ratio data for ACM is currently unavailable.

VRT

1.72

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
4.74
Q3
3.44
Median
2.63
Q1
1.95
Min
1.17

VRT’s Current Ratio of 1.72 falls into the lower quartile for the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry. This indicates a tighter liquidity situation and a more constrained capacity to handle short-term debt than many of its competitors.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their Current Ratio against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio

ACM

1.32

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
1.76
Q3
0.91
Median
0.67
Q1
0.28
Min
0.01

ACM’s leverage is in the upper quartile of the Engineering & Construction industry, with a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 1.32. While this approach can boost equity growth, it also exposes the company to greater financial vulnerability.

VRT

1.18

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
0.82
Q3
0.68
Median
0.61
Q1
0.47
Min
0.33

With a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 1.18, VRT operates with exceptionally high leverage compared to the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry norm. This suggests an aggressive reliance on debt financing, which can magnify returns but also significantly elevates financial risk.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their D/E Ratio against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio

ACM

5.28

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
20.20
Q3
11.91
Median
6.46
Q1
3.18
Min
-2.69

ACM’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 5.28 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Engineering & Construction industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

VRT

10.65

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
21.00
Q3
9.09
Median
3.12
Q1
-7.14
Min
-31.43

VRT’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 10.65 is in the upper quartile for the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry, signifying a strong and healthy capacity to meet its interest payments from operating profits.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their Interest Coverage against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolACMVRT
Current Ratio (TTM)--1.72
Quick Ratio (TTM)--1.28
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM)1.321.18
Debt-to-Asset Ratio (TTM)0.260.33
Net Debt-to-EBITDA Ratio (TTM)1.231.15
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)5.2810.65

Growth

The following charts compare key year-over-year (YoY) growth metrics for ACM and VRT. These metrics are based on the companies’ annual financial reports.

Revenue Growth

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their annual year-over-year Revenue Growth.

Earnings Per Share (EPS) Growth

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their annual year-over-year Earnings Per Share (EPS) Growth.

Free Cash Flow Growth

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their annual year-over-year Free Cash Flow Growth.

Dividend

Dividend Yield

ACM

0.86%

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
1.31%
Q3
0.40%
Median
0.00%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

With a Dividend Yield of 0.86%, ACM offers a more attractive income stream than most of its peers in the Engineering & Construction industry, signaling a strong commitment to shareholder returns.

VRT

0.11%

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
1.81%
Q3
0.50%
Median
0.00%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

VRT’s Dividend Yield of 0.11% is consistent with its peers in the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their Dividend Yield against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio

ACM

20.16%

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
32.30%
Q3
7.09%
Median
0.00%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

ACM’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 20.16% is in the upper quartile for the Engineering & Construction industry. This indicates a strong commitment to shareholder returns but also suggests that a smaller portion of earnings is retained for reinvestment compared to many peers.

VRT

7.07%

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
162.68%
Q3
20.84%
Median
4.65%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

VRT’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 7.07% is within the typical range for the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their Payout Ratio against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolACMVRT
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.86%0.11%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)20.16%7.07%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio

ACM

24.84

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
95.41
Q3
56.70
Median
32.28
Q1
22.94
Min
4.72

ACM’s P/E Ratio of 24.84 is within the middle range for the Engineering & Construction industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

VRT

73.08

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
27.52
Q3
27.52
Median
24.22
Q1
20.08
Min
9.48

At 73.08, VRT’s P/E Ratio is exceptionally high, exceeding the typical maximum for the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry. This suggests the stock may be significantly overvalued compared to its peers and implies high market expectations that could be difficult to meet.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their P/E Ratio against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Forward P/E to Growth Ratio

ACM

2.51

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
4.99
Q3
3.64
Median
2.51
Q1
1.64
Min
0.03

The Forward PEG Ratio is often not a primary valuation metric in the Engineering & Construction industry.

VRT

4.20

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
5.30
Q3
4.04
Median
2.62
Q1
2.03
Min
0.01

The Forward PEG Ratio is often not a primary valuation metric in the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their Forward PEG Ratio against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio

ACM

0.95

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
3.34
Q3
2.05
Median
1.50
Q1
0.83
Min
0.44

ACM’s P/S Ratio of 0.95 aligns with the market consensus for the Engineering & Construction industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

VRT

5.79

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
5.76
Q3
5.66
Median
3.18
Q1
1.88
Min
0.31

With a P/S Ratio of 5.79, VRT trades at a valuation that eclipses even the highest in the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry. This implies the market has priced in exceptionally optimistic scenarios for future revenue growth, posing considerable valuation risk.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their P/S Ratio against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio

ACM

6.71

Engineering & Construction Industry

Max
10.70
Q3
7.33
Median
4.69
Q1
2.53
Min
0.79

ACM’s P/B Ratio of 6.71 is within the conventional range for the Engineering & Construction industry. This shows a balanced market view, where the stock’s price is neither at a significant premium nor a discount to the book value of its peers.

VRT

18.26

Electrical Equipment & Parts Industry

Max
10.91
Q3
6.77
Median
3.73
Q1
1.80
Min
0.59

At 18.26, VRT’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Electrical Equipment & Parts industry. This signifies that the market’s valuation is heavily reliant on future potential rather than its current net asset value, which can be a high-risk proposition.

ACM vs. VRT: A comparison of their P/B Ratio against their respective Engineering & Construction and Electrical Equipment & Parts industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolACMVRT
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM)24.8473.08
Forward PEG Ratio (TTM)2.514.20
Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM)0.955.79
Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM)6.7118.26
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM)18.3137.37
EV-to-EBITDA (TTM)14.5134.51
EV-to-Sales (TTM)1.045.99