Seek Returns logo

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

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolFLRGWW
Company NameFluor CorporationW.W. Grainger, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorIndustrialsIndustrials
GICS IndustryConstruction & EngineeringTrading Companies & Distributors
Market Capitalization6.61 billion USD47.81 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateDecember 1, 2000February 21, 1973
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of FLR and GWW 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolFLRGWW
5-Day Price Return-1.61%2.57%
13-Week Price Return7.86%-9.16%
26-Week Price Return-9.01%-2.74%
52-Week Price Return-15.88%4.33%
Month-to-Date Return-27.99%-3.84%
Year-to-Date Return-17.11%-5.16%
10-Day Avg. Volume4.41M0.29M
3-Month Avg. Volume3.95M0.28M
3-Month Volatility71.28%26.99%
Beta1.541.20

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

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.

GWW

54.86%

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
32.33%
Q3
19.92%
Median
14.05%
Q1
11.46%
Min
0.91%

GWW’s Return on Equity of 54.86% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

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.

GWW

10.99%

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
17.73%
Q3
10.81%
Median
6.13%
Q1
4.33%
Min
2.09%

A Net Profit Margin of 10.99% places GWW in the upper quartile for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry, signifying strong profitability and more effective cost management than most of its peers.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

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.

GWW

15.27%

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
25.50%
Q3
15.13%
Median
7.46%
Q1
5.44%
Min
3.55%

An Operating Profit Margin of 15.27% places GWW in the upper quartile for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry. This signals a strong ability to translate revenue into operating profit, outperforming most of its competitors in core business efficiency.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolFLRGWW
Return on Equity (TTM)105.11%54.86%
Return on Assets (TTM)45.38%21.63%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)25.35%10.99%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)1.84%15.27%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)3.02%39.25%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

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.

GWW

2.82

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
2.82
Q3
2.13
Median
1.60
Q1
1.43
Min
0.46

GWW’s Current Ratio of 2.82 is exceptionally high, placing it well outside the typical range for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry. This indicates a very strong liquidity position, though such a high ratio may also suggest that the company is not using its assets efficiently to generate profits.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

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.

GWW

0.64

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
1.88
Q3
1.18
Median
0.74
Q1
0.54
Min
0.00

GWW’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.64 is typical for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

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.

GWW

34.56

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
15.13
Q3
7.93
Median
5.75
Q1
2.70
Min
-1.67

With an Interest Coverage Ratio of 34.56, GWW demonstrates a superior capacity to service its debt, placing it well above the typical range for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry. This stems from either robust earnings or a conservative debt load.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolFLRGWW
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.622.82
Quick Ratio (MRQ)1.621.53
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.180.64
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)--34.56

Growth

Revenue Growth

FLR vs. GWW: 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

FLR vs. GWW: 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)

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.

GWW

0.92%

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
4.99%
Q3
3.04%
Median
1.94%
Q1
1.22%
Min
0.00%

GWW’s Dividend Yield of 0.92% is in the lower quartile for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry. This suggests the company’s strategy likely favors retaining earnings for growth over providing a high dividend income.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

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.

GWW

22.89%

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
95.14%
Q3
62.08%
Median
51.17%
Q1
26.24%
Min
0.00%

GWW’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 22.89% is in the lower quartile for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry. This suggests a conservative dividend policy, with a strategic focus on reinvesting profits for future growth.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolFLRGWW
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.00%0.92%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)10.51%22.89%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

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.

GWW

24.84

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
48.55
Q3
26.73
Median
17.17
Q1
10.78
Min
1.62

GWW’s P/E Ratio of 24.84 is within the middle range for the Trading Companies & Distributors 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 vs. GWW: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

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.

GWW

2.73

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
4.88
Q3
2.56
Median
1.02
Q1
0.60
Min
0.29

GWW’s P/S Ratio of 2.73 is in the upper echelon for the Trading Companies & Distributors industry. This means the company is valued richly on its revenue stream compared to its peers, suggesting the stock is priced for a high level of future performance.

FLR vs. GWW: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

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.

GWW

13.60

Trading Companies & Distributors Industry

Max
8.77
Q3
4.33
Median
2.00
Q1
1.11
Min
0.35

At 13.60, GWW’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Trading Companies & Distributors 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 vs. GWW: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Trading Companies & Distributors industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolFLRGWW
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)1.5924.84
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)0.402.73
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)1.4213.60
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)6.9633.72