Seek Returns logo

CP vs. FLR: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolCPFLR
Company NameCanadian Pacific Kansas City LimitedFluor Corporation
CountryCanadaUnited States
GICS SectorIndustrialsIndustrials
GICS IndustryGround TransportationConstruction & Engineering
Market Capitalization68.69 billion USD6.93 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateDecember 30, 1983December 1, 2000
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of CP and FLR 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolCPFLR
5-Day Price Return0.70%-3.84%
13-Week Price Return-3.46%-17.94%
26-Week Price Return-1.02%11.47%
52-Week Price Return-10.39%-12.15%
Month-to-Date Return-0.92%2.56%
Year-to-Date Return-0.41%-14.70%
10-Day Avg. Volume2.01M4.01M
3-Month Avg. Volume1.57M4.26M
3-Month Volatility20.33%63.23%
Beta0.601.60

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

CP

8.97%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
23.35%
Q3
13.74%
Median
9.05%
Q1
6.86%
Min
1.73%

CP’s Return on Equity of 8.97% is on par with the norm for the Ground Transportation industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

FLR

105.11%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
26.79%
Q3
16.47%
Median
10.66%
Q1
8.46%
Min
-1.86%

FLR’s Return on Equity of 105.11% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Construction & Engineering industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

CP

28.04%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
32.19%
Q3
17.08%
Median
7.19%
Q1
4.45%
Min
-5.54%

A Net Profit Margin of 28.04% places CP in the upper quartile for the Ground Transportation industry, signifying strong profitability and more effective cost management than most of its peers.

FLR

25.35%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
11.67%
Q3
6.13%
Median
3.82%
Q1
2.31%
Min
-2.77%

FLR’s Net Profit Margin of 25.35% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Construction & Engineering industry. This demonstrates outstanding operational efficiency and a strong competitive advantage in converting revenue into profit.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

CP

36.35%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
42.90%
Q3
23.80%
Median
10.93%
Q1
7.06%
Min
-12.94%

An Operating Profit Margin of 36.35% places CP in the upper quartile for the Ground Transportation industry. This signals a strong ability to translate revenue into operating profit, outperforming most of its competitors in core business efficiency.

FLR

1.84%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
17.78%
Q3
9.61%
Median
6.19%
Q1
3.73%
Min
-1.78%

FLR’s Operating Profit Margin of 1.84% is in the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry. This indicates weaker profitability from core operations, which may stem from inefficiencies or competitive pressures on pricing.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolCPFLR
Return on Equity (TTM)8.97%105.11%
Return on Assets (TTM)4.87%45.38%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)28.04%25.35%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)36.35%1.84%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)85.09%3.02%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

CP

0.93

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
2.00
Q3
1.31
Median
0.98
Q1
0.74
Min
0.35

CP’s Current Ratio of 0.93 aligns with the median group of the Ground Transportation industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

FLR

1.62

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
2.17
Q3
1.50
Median
1.23
Q1
1.00
Min
0.65

FLR’s Current Ratio of 1.62 is in the upper quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry. This signifies a strong liquidity position, suggesting the company is well-equipped to cover its immediate liabilities compared to its peers.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

CP

0.48

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
2.51
Q3
1.48
Median
1.02
Q1
0.48
Min
0.00

Falling into the lower quartile for the Ground Transportation industry, CP’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.48 points to a conservative financing strategy. This results in lower financial risk but potentially limits strategic investments compared to more leveraged competitors.

FLR

0.18

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
2.37
Q3
1.24
Median
0.62
Q1
0.31
Min
0.00

Falling into the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry, FLR’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.18 points to a conservative financing strategy. This results in lower financial risk but potentially limits strategic investments compared to more leveraged competitors.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

CP

6.97

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
59.80
Q3
25.78
Median
8.23
Q1
2.52
Min
-24.57

CP’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 6.97 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Ground Transportation industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

FLR

--

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
36.37
Q3
17.88
Median
8.20
Q1
4.98
Min
-6.49

Interest Coverage Ratio data for FLR is currently unavailable.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolCPFLR
Current Ratio (MRQ)0.931.62
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.811.62
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.480.18
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)6.97--

Growth

Revenue Growth

CP vs. FLR: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

CP vs. FLR: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

CP

0.78%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
5.29%
Q3
2.57%
Median
1.59%
Q1
0.71%
Min
0.00%

CP’s Dividend Yield of 0.78% is consistent with its peers in the Ground Transportation industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

FLR

0.00%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
5.80%
Q3
3.33%
Median
2.22%
Q1
0.21%
Min
0.00%

FLR currently does not pay a dividend, resulting in a yield of 0%. This is a common strategy for growth-focused companies that prioritize reinvesting earnings, though it may be less typical in mature, income-oriented sectors.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

CP

17.72%

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
149.12%
Q3
75.08%
Median
41.35%
Q1
16.42%
Min
0.00%

CP’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 17.72% is within the typical range for the Ground Transportation industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

FLR

0.00%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
139.17%
Q3
74.39%
Median
51.48%
Q1
15.67%
Min
0.00%

FLR has a Dividend Payout Ratio of 0%, indicating it does not currently pay a dividend. This is a common strategy for growth-oriented companies that reinvest all profits back into the business.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolCPFLR
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.78%0.00%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)17.72%0.00%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

CP

22.75

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
39.04
Q3
24.45
Median
17.51
Q1
12.92
Min
5.87

CP’s P/E Ratio of 22.75 is within the middle range for the Ground Transportation industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

FLR

1.65

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
41.00
Q3
26.91
Median
16.02
Q1
13.49
Min
1.65

In the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry, FLR’s P/E Ratio of 1.65 suggests the stock may be undervalued compared to its peers, potentially presenting an attractive entry point for investors.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

CP

6.38

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
2.82
Q3
2.22
Median
1.41
Q1
0.88
Min
0.24

With a P/S Ratio of 6.38, CP trades at a valuation that eclipses even the highest in the Ground Transportation industry. This implies the market has priced in exceptionally optimistic scenarios for future revenue growth, posing considerable valuation risk.

FLR

0.42

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
2.93
Q3
1.65
Median
0.71
Q1
0.45
Min
0.11

In the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry, FLR’s P/S Ratio of 0.42 indicates its revenue is valued more conservatively than most of its peers. This could present a compelling opportunity if the market has overlooked its sales-generating capabilities.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

CP

2.18

Ground Transportation Industry

Max
5.27
Q3
3.03
Median
1.40
Q1
1.18
Min
0.67

CP’s P/B Ratio of 2.18 is within the conventional range for the Ground Transportation 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.

FLR

1.42

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
7.96
Q3
4.06
Median
1.98
Q1
1.23
Min
0.24

FLR’s P/B Ratio of 1.42 is within the conventional range for the Construction & Engineering 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.

CP vs. FLR: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Ground Transportation and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolCPFLR
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)22.751.65
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)6.380.42
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)2.181.42
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)38.047.22