DRS vs. FER: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on August 26, 2025

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

Company Profile

Symbol	DRS	FER
Company Name	Leonardo DRS, Inc.	Ferrovial SE
Country	United States	Netherlands
GICS Sector	Industrials	Industrials
GICS Industry	Aerospace & Defense	Construction & Engineering
Market Capitalization	10.96 billion USD	40.19 billion USD
Exchange	NasdaqGS	NasdaqGS
Listing Date	June 24, 1985	August 13, 2012
Security Type	Common Stock	Common Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of DRS and FER 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

Symbol	DRS	FER
5-Day Price Return	-3.60%	1.39%
13-Week Price Return	1.28%	3.28%
26-Week Price Return	40.15%	9.21%
52-Week Price Return	47.95%	29.97%
Month-to-Date Return	-0.99%	5.95%
Year-to-Date Return	27.48%	17.17%
10-Day Avg. Volume	0.99M	0.55M
3-Month Avg. Volume	1.25M	0.66M
3-Month Volatility	36.92%	12.05%
Beta	0.55	0.92

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

DRS

9.80%

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 43.89%
Q3: 22.42%
Median: 12.50%
Q1: 5.21%
Min: -6.24%

DRS’s Return on Equity of 9.80% is on par with the norm for the Aerospace & Defense industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

FER

56.21%

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

FER’s Return on Equity of 56.21% 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.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

DRS

7.31%

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 14.54%
Q3: 8.08%
Median: 6.17%
Q1: 2.49%
Min: -1.63%

DRS’s Net Profit Margin of 7.31% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Aerospace & Defense industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

FER

35.99%

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

FER’s Net Profit Margin of 35.99% 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.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

DRS

9.47%

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 16.63%
Q3: 10.38%
Median: 8.29%
Q1: 6.21%
Min: 0.95%

DRS’s Operating Profit Margin of 9.47% is around the midpoint for the Aerospace & Defense industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

FER

34.91%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max: 17.56%
Q3: 9.36%
Median: 5.46%
Q1: 3.47%
Min: -1.93%

FER’s Operating Profit Margin of 34.91% is exceptionally high, placing it well above the typical range for the Construction & Engineering industry. This demonstrates outstanding efficiency in managing its core operations, which can be a result of strong pricing power or superior cost control.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

Symbol	DRS	FER
Return on Equity (TTM)	9.80%	56.21%
Return on Assets (TTM)	6.17%	12.11%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)	7.31%	35.99%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)	9.47%	34.91%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)	23.15%	87.83%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

DRS

2.11

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 3.09
Q3: 1.98
Median: 1.23
Q1: 1.03
Min: 0.02

DRS’s Current Ratio of 2.11 is in the upper quartile for the Aerospace & Defense industry. This signifies a strong liquidity position, suggesting the company is well-equipped to cover its immediate liabilities compared to its peers.

FER

0.94

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max: 1.98
Q3: 1.53
Median: 1.24
Q1: 1.05
Min: 0.66

FER’s Current Ratio of 0.94 falls into the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry. This indicates a tighter liquidity situation and a more constrained capacity to handle short-term debt than many of its competitors.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

DRS

0.14

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 1.70
Q3: 1.04
Median: 0.68
Q1: 0.41
Min: 0.00

Falling into the lower quartile for the Aerospace & Defense industry, DRS’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.14 points to a conservative financing strategy. This results in lower financial risk but potentially limits strategic investments compared to more leveraged competitors.

FER

1.95

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max: 2.49
Q3: 1.19
Median: 0.63
Q1: 0.29
Min: 0.00

FER’s leverage is in the upper quartile of the Construction & Engineering industry, with a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 1.95. While this approach can boost equity growth, it also exposes the company to greater financial vulnerability.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

DRS

13.57

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 36.57
Q3: 19.90
Median: 7.04
Q1: 2.40
Min: -7.63

DRS’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 13.57 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Aerospace & Defense industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

FER

9.20

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max: 23.59
Q3: 14.49
Median: 8.20
Q1: 5.26
Min: -6.49

FER’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 9.20 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Construction & Engineering industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

Symbol	DRS	FER
Current Ratio (MRQ)	2.11	0.94
Quick Ratio (MRQ)	1.67	0.86
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)	0.14	1.95
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)	13.57	9.20

Growth

Revenue Growth

DRS vs. FER: 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

DRS vs. FER: 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)

DRS

0.44%

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 2.03%
Q3: 1.22%
Median: 0.43%
Q1: 0.00%
Min: 0.00%

DRS’s Dividend Yield of 0.44% is consistent with its peers in the Aerospace & Defense industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

FER

0.36%

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max: 6.28%
Q3: 3.25%
Median: 2.02%
Q1: 0.23%
Min: 0.00%

FER’s Dividend Yield of 0.36% is consistent with its peers in the Construction & Engineering industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

DRS

0.00%

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 83.87%
Q3: 49.90%
Median: 16.48%
Q1: 0.00%
Min: 0.00%

DRS 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.

FER

3.63%

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

FER’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 3.63% is in the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry. This suggests a conservative dividend policy, with a strategic focus on reinvesting profits for future growth.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

Symbol	DRS	FER
Dividend Yield (TTM)	0.44%	0.36%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)	0.00%	3.63%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

DRS

43.71

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 65.97
Q3: 54.11
Median: 34.53
Q1: 23.66
Min: 0.00

DRS’s P/E Ratio of 43.71 is within the middle range for the Aerospace & Defense industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

FER

10.03

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max: 36.96
Q3: 24.81
Median: 15.45
Q1: 12.51
Min: 2.74

In the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry, FER’s P/E Ratio of 10.03 suggests the stock may be undervalued compared to its peers, potentially presenting an attractive entry point for investors.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

DRS

3.19

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 8.07
Q3: 4.49
Median: 2.42
Q1: 1.39
Min: 0.00

DRS’s P/S Ratio of 3.19 aligns with the market consensus for the Aerospace & Defense industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

FER

3.61

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max: 3.22
Q3: 1.63
Median: 0.61
Q1: 0.48
Min: 0.11

With a P/S Ratio of 3.61, FER trades at a valuation that eclipses even the highest in the Construction & Engineering industry. This implies the market has priced in exceptionally optimistic scenarios for future revenue growth, posing considerable valuation risk.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

DRS

4.76

Aerospace & Defense Industry

Max: 13.67
Q3: 7.92
Median: 4.65
Q1: 2.68
Min: 0.82

DRS’s P/B Ratio of 4.76 is within the conventional range for the Aerospace & Defense 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.

FER

5.63

Construction & Engineering Industry

Max: 5.74
Q3: 3.33
Median: 1.49
Q1: 1.20
Min: 0.23

FER’s P/B Ratio of 5.63 is in the upper tier for the Construction & Engineering industry. This indicates that investors are paying a premium relative to the company’s net assets, a valuation that hinges on its ability to generate superior profits.

DRS vs. FER: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Aerospace & Defense and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

Symbol	DRS	FER
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)	43.71	10.03
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)	3.19	3.61
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)	4.76	5.63
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)	23.70	29.43