Seek Returns logo

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

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolCTASFLR
Company NameCintas CorporationFluor Corporation
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorIndustrialsIndustrials
GICS IndustryCommercial Services & SuppliesConstruction & Engineering
Market Capitalization85.91 billion USD6.64 billion USD
ExchangeNasdaqGSNYSE
Listing DateAugust 19, 1983December 1, 2000
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of CTAS 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolCTASFLR
5-Day Price Return-1.35%0.15%
13-Week Price Return-5.61%-5.60%
26-Week Price Return4.29%8.93%
52-Week Price Return7.45%-16.50%
Month-to-Date Return-4.20%-27.60%
Year-to-Date Return16.69%-16.67%
10-Day Avg. Volume1.94M3.99M
3-Month Avg. Volume1.49M4.05M
3-Month Volatility17.63%68.88%
Beta1.021.50

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

CTAS

41.21%

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
31.93%
Q3
18.03%
Median
9.43%
Q1
6.44%
Min
-9.69%

CTAS’s Return on Equity of 41.21% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Commercial Services & Supplies industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

FLR

105.11%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
29.61%
Q3
17.18%
Median
10.42%
Q1
8.10%
Min
-0.10%

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.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

CTAS

17.53%

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
17.53%
Q3
9.01%
Median
5.20%
Q1
2.75%
Min
-2.31%

A Net Profit Margin of 17.53% places CTAS in the upper quartile for the Commercial Services & Supplies industry, signifying strong profitability and more effective cost management than most of its peers.

FLR

25.35%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
11.14%
Q3
6.17%
Median
3.85%
Q1
2.40%
Min
-0.05%

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.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

CTAS

22.82%

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
23.43%
Q3
12.19%
Median
8.10%
Q1
3.18%
Min
-6.03%

An Operating Profit Margin of 22.82% places CTAS in the upper quartile for the Commercial Services & Supplies 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
17.56%
Q3
9.36%
Median
5.46%
Q1
3.47%
Min
-1.93%

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.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolCTASFLR
Return on Equity (TTM)41.21%105.11%
Return on Assets (TTM)19.14%45.38%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)17.53%25.35%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)22.82%1.84%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)50.04%3.02%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

CTAS

2.09

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
2.94
Q3
1.89
Median
1.38
Q1
0.87
Min
0.53

CTAS’s Current Ratio of 2.09 is in the upper quartile for the Commercial Services & Supplies industry. This signifies a strong liquidity position, suggesting the company is well-equipped to cover its immediate liabilities compared to its peers.

FLR

1.62

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
1.98
Q3
1.53
Median
1.24
Q1
1.05
Min
0.66

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.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

CTAS

0.52

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
1.67
Q3
1.08
Median
0.73
Q1
0.36
Min
0.00

CTAS’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.52 is typical for the Commercial Services & Supplies industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

FLR

0.18

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
2.49
Q3
1.19
Median
0.63
Q1
0.29
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.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

CTAS

24.70

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
24.70
Q3
12.37
Median
7.16
Q1
2.69
Min
-10.97

CTAS’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 24.70 is in the upper quartile for the Commercial Services & Supplies industry, signifying a strong and healthy capacity to meet its interest payments from operating profits.

FLR

--

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
23.59
Q3
14.49
Median
8.20
Q1
5.26
Min
-6.49

Interest Coverage Ratio data for FLR is currently unavailable.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolCTASFLR
Current Ratio (MRQ)2.091.62
Quick Ratio (MRQ)1.711.62
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.520.18
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)24.70--

Growth

Revenue Growth

CTAS 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

CTAS 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)

CTAS

0.70%

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
3.44%
Q3
2.30%
Median
1.37%
Q1
0.63%
Min
0.00%

CTAS’s Dividend Yield of 0.70% is consistent with its peers in the Commercial Services & Supplies industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

FLR

0.00%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
6.28%
Q3
3.25%
Median
2.02%
Q1
0.23%
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.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

CTAS

33.75%

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
137.88%
Q3
72.93%
Median
40.45%
Q1
23.31%
Min
0.00%

CTAS’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 33.75% is within the typical range for the Commercial Services & Supplies industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

FLR

10.51%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
139.17%
Q3
69.47%
Median
40.99%
Q1
10.51%
Min
0.00%

FLR’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 10.51% is within the typical range for the Construction & Engineering industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolCTASFLR
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.70%0.00%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)33.75%10.51%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

CTAS

48.29

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
57.20
Q3
37.10
Median
22.38
Q1
16.35
Min
0.00

A P/E Ratio of 48.29 places CTAS in the upper quartile for the Commercial Services & Supplies industry. This high valuation relative to peers suggests the market holds elevated expectations for the company’s future growth.

FLR

1.59

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
36.96
Q3
24.81
Median
15.45
Q1
12.51
Min
2.74

FLR’s P/E Ratio of 1.59 is below the typical range for the Construction & Engineering industry. This may indicate that the stock is potentially undervalued, or it could reflect market concerns about the company’s future prospects.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

CTAS

8.46

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
4.64
Q3
2.28
Median
0.97
Q1
0.64
Min
0.00

With a P/S Ratio of 8.46, CTAS trades at a valuation that eclipses even the highest in the Commercial Services & Supplies industry. This implies the market has priced in exceptionally optimistic scenarios for future revenue growth, posing considerable valuation risk.

FLR

0.40

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
3.22
Q3
1.63
Median
0.61
Q1
0.48
Min
0.11

In the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry, FLR’s P/S Ratio of 0.40 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.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

CTAS

19.50

Commercial Services & Supplies Industry

Max
6.71
Q3
4.38
Median
2.39
Q1
1.57
Min
0.43

At 19.50, CTAS’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Commercial Services & Supplies 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.

FLR

1.42

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max
5.74
Q3
3.33
Median
1.49
Q1
1.20
Min
0.23

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.

CTAS vs. FLR: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Commercial Services & Supplies and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolCTASFLR
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)48.291.59
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)8.460.40
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)19.501.42
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)49.806.96