Seek Returns logo

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

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolFLRSWK
Company NameFluor CorporationStanley Black & Decker, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorIndustrialsIndustrials
GICS IndustryConstruction & EngineeringMachinery
Market Capitalization6.93 billion USD11.43 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateDecember 1, 2000March 17, 1980
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of FLR and SWK 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. SWK: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolFLRSWK
5-Day Price Return-3.84%-1.01%
13-Week Price Return-17.94%9.71%
26-Week Price Return11.47%-5.24%
52-Week Price Return-12.15%-32.25%
Month-to-Date Return2.56%0.05%
Year-to-Date Return-14.70%-7.42%
10-Day Avg. Volume4.01M2.02M
3-Month Avg. Volume4.26M2.23M
3-Month Volatility63.23%37.86%
Beta1.601.22

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

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.

SWK

6.59%

Machinery Industry

Max
33.68%
Q3
20.05%
Median
12.37%
Q1
8.67%
Min
-7.69%

SWK’s Return on Equity of 6.59% is in the lower quartile for the Machinery industry. This indicates a less efficient generation of profit from its equity base when compared to its competitors.

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

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

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.

SWK

3.85%

Machinery Industry

Max
19.72%
Q3
11.07%
Median
7.62%
Q1
5.05%
Min
-1.52%

Falling into the lower quartile for the Machinery industry, SWK’s Net Profit Margin of 3.85% indicates weaker profitability. This means the company retains a smaller portion of each dollar in sales as profit compared to its competitors.

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

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

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.

SWK

4.70%

Machinery Industry

Max
26.63%
Q3
15.99%
Median
11.27%
Q1
7.72%
Min
-0.51%

SWK’s Operating Profit Margin of 4.70% is in the lower quartile for the Machinery industry. This indicates weaker profitability from core operations, which may stem from inefficiencies or competitive pressures on pricing.

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

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolFLRSWK
Return on Equity (TTM)105.11%6.59%
Return on Assets (TTM)45.38%2.63%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)25.35%3.85%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)1.84%4.70%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)3.02%30.03%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

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.

SWK

1.04

Machinery Industry

Max
3.13
Q3
2.12
Median
1.72
Q1
1.34
Min
0.77

SWK’s Current Ratio of 1.04 falls into the lower quartile for the Machinery industry. This indicates a tighter liquidity situation and a more constrained capacity to handle short-term debt than many of its competitors.

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

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

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.

SWK

0.74

Machinery Industry

Max
1.56
Q3
0.79
Median
0.44
Q1
0.27
Min
0.00

SWK’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.74 is typical for the Machinery industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

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

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

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.

SWK

1.75

Machinery Industry

Max
81.58
Q3
37.68
Median
13.76
Q1
7.97
Min
-1.43

In the lower quartile for the Machinery industry, SWK’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 1.75 indicates a tighter cushion for servicing debt, suggesting less financial flexibility than many of its competitors.

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

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolFLRSWK
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.621.04
Quick Ratio (MRQ)1.620.29
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.180.74
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)--1.75

Growth

Revenue Growth

FLR vs. SWK: 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. SWK: 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
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.

SWK

7.58%

Machinery Industry

Max
4.55%
Q3
2.66%
Median
1.90%
Q1
1.23%
Min
0.00%

SWK’s Dividend Yield of 7.58% is exceptionally high, placing it well above the typical range for the Machinery industry. While this may seem attractive, an unusually high yield can sometimes be a warning sign, reflecting a falling stock price or market concerns about the dividend’s sustainability.

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

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

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.

SWK

148.38%

Machinery Industry

Max
198.34%
Q3
101.42%
Median
62.79%
Q1
29.85%
Min
0.00%

SWK’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 148.38% is in the upper quartile for the Machinery 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.

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

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolFLRSWK
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.00%7.58%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)0.00%148.38%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

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.

SWK

19.59

Machinery Industry

Max
47.95
Q3
30.11
Median
22.35
Q1
16.56
Min
6.48

SWK’s P/E Ratio of 19.59 is within the middle range for the Machinery 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. SWK: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Machinery industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

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.

SWK

0.75

Machinery Industry

Max
4.97
Q3
2.76
Median
1.65
Q1
1.04
Min
0.04

In the lower quartile for the Machinery industry, SWK’s P/S Ratio of 0.75 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.

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

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

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.

SWK

1.16

Machinery Industry

Max
7.29
Q3
4.06
Median
2.67
Q1
1.54
Min
0.52

SWK’s P/B Ratio of 1.16 is in the lower quartile for the Machinery industry. From a value investing perspective, this is favorable, as it suggests the stock is trading at a discount to its net asset value and may offer a greater margin of safety.

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

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolFLRSWK
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)1.6519.59
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)0.420.75
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)1.421.16
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)7.226.90