LTM vs. PWR: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on August 27, 2025

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

Company Profile

LTM trades as an American Depositary Receipt (ADR), offering U.S. investors a convenient way to access its foreign-listed shares. In contrast, PWR is a standard domestic listing.

Symbol	LTM	PWR
Company Name	--	Quanta Services, Inc.
Country	Chile	United States
GICS Sector	Industrials	Industrials
GICS Industry	Passenger Airlines	Construction & Engineering
Market Capitalization	14.63 billion USD	56.37 billion USD
Exchange	NYSE	NYSE
Listing Date	July 25, 2024	February 12, 1998
Security Type	ADR	Common Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of LTM and PWR 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

Symbol	LTM	PWR
5-Day Price Return	5.48%	-0.25%
13-Week Price Return	32.55%	14.35%
26-Week Price Return	50.72%	29.53%
52-Week Price Return	64.89%	41.27%
Month-to-Date Return	8.56%	-6.85%
Year-to-Date Return	68.17%	19.70%
10-Day Avg. Volume	3,892.38M	0.99M
3-Month Avg. Volume	1,983.74M	1.18M
3-Month Volatility	24.83%	22.83%
Beta	0.58	1.05

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

LTM

141.28%

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 49.96%
Q3: 28.15%
Median: 15.41%
Q1: 8.29%
Min: -11.01%

LTM’s Return on Equity of 141.28% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Passenger Airlines industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

PWR

13.09%

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s Return on Equity of 13.09% is on par with the norm for the Construction & Engineering industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

LTM

8.88%

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 17.65%
Q3: 8.90%
Median: 5.80%
Q1: 2.02%
Min: -3.12%

LTM’s Net Profit Margin of 8.88% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Passenger Airlines industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

PWR

3.73%

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s Net Profit Margin of 3.73% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Construction & Engineering industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

LTM

14.24%

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 22.47%
Q3: 12.33%
Median: 8.62%
Q1: 4.43%
Min: -2.88%

An Operating Profit Margin of 14.24% places LTM in the upper quartile for the Passenger Airlines industry. This signals a strong ability to translate revenue into operating profit, outperforming most of its competitors in core business efficiency.

PWR

5.73%

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s Operating Profit Margin of 5.73% is around the midpoint for the Construction & Engineering industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Profitability at a Glance

Symbol	LTM	PWR
Return on Equity (TTM)	141.28%	13.09%
Return on Assets (TTM)	7.44%	5.08%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)	8.88%	3.73%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)	14.24%	5.73%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)	27.19%	15.04%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

LTM

0.60

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 1.46
Q3: 0.94
Median: 0.76
Q1: 0.54
Min: 0.17

LTM’s Current Ratio of 0.60 aligns with the median group of the Passenger Airlines industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

PWR

1.37

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s Current Ratio of 1.37 aligns with the median group of the Construction & Engineering industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

LTM

8.22

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 9.80
Q3: 4.82
Median: 1.30
Q1: 0.89
Min: 0.00

LTM’s leverage is in the upper quartile of the Passenger Airlines industry, with a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 8.22. While this approach can boost equity growth, it also exposes the company to greater financial vulnerability.

PWR

0.60

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 0.60 is typical for the Construction & Engineering industry, indicating its use of leverage is in line with the sector norm. This suggests a balanced approach to its capital structure.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

LTM

2.97

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 22.60
Q3: 16.29
Median: 6.75
Q1: 1.94
Min: -8.55

LTM’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 2.97 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Passenger Airlines industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

PWR

10.76

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 10.76 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Construction & Engineering industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Financial Strength at a Glance

Symbol	LTM	PWR
Current Ratio (MRQ)	0.60	1.37
Quick Ratio (MRQ)	0.53	1.24
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)	8.22	0.60
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)	2.97	10.76

Growth

Revenue Growth

LTM vs. PWR: 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

LTM vs. PWR: 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)

LTM

2.14%

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 6.71%
Q3: 3.95%
Median: 1.10%
Q1: 0.00%
Min: 0.00%

LTM’s Dividend Yield of 2.14% is consistent with its peers in the Passenger Airlines industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

PWR

0.10%

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s Dividend Yield of 0.10% is in the lower quartile for the Construction & Engineering industry. This suggests the company’s strategy likely favors retaining earnings for growth over providing a high dividend income.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

LTM

49.16%

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 71.59%
Q3: 38.54%
Median: 8.16%
Q1: 0.00%
Min: 0.00%

LTM’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 49.16% is in the upper quartile for the Passenger Airlines 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.

PWR

5.92%

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 5.92% 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.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Dividend at a Glance

Symbol	LTM	PWR
Dividend Yield (TTM)	2.14%	0.10%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)	49.16%	5.92%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

LTM

11.74

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 13.29
Q3: 11.94
Median: 8.78
Q1: 7.42
Min: 3.07

LTM’s P/E Ratio of 11.74 is within the middle range for the Passenger Airlines industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

PWR

57.10

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

At 57.10, PWR’s P/E Ratio is exceptionally high, exceeding the typical maximum for the Construction & Engineering industry. This suggests the stock may be significantly overvalued compared to its peers and implies high market expectations that could be difficult to meet.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

LTM

1.04

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 1.09
Q3: 0.74
Median: 0.61
Q1: 0.44
Min: 0.09

LTM’s P/S Ratio of 1.04 is in the upper echelon for the Passenger Airlines 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.

PWR

2.13

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

PWR’s P/S Ratio of 2.13 is in the upper echelon for the Construction & Engineering 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.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

LTM

12.93

Passenger Airlines Industry

Max: 3.44
Q3: 2.89
Median: 1.84
Q1: 1.22
Min: 0.56

At 12.93, LTM’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Passenger Airlines 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.

PWR

7.13

Construction & Engineering Industry

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

At 7.13, PWR’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Construction & Engineering 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.

LTM vs. PWR: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Passenger Airlines and Construction & Engineering industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

Symbol	LTM	PWR
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)	11.74	57.10
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)	1.04	2.13
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)	12.93	7.13
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)	10.15	40.85