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

Updated on August 28, 2025

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

Company Profile

Symbol	PWR	SWK
Company Name	Quanta Services, Inc.	Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.
Country	United States	United States
GICS Sector	Industrials	Industrials
GICS Industry	Construction & Engineering	Machinery
Market Capitalization	56.37 billion USD	11.84 billion USD
Exchange	NYSE	NYSE
Listing Date	February 12, 1998	March 17, 1980
Security Type	Common Stock	Common Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of PWR 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.

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

Symbol	PWR	SWK
5-Day Price Return	-0.25%	0.34%
13-Week Price Return	14.35%	15.27%
26-Week Price Return	29.53%	-13.39%
52-Week Price Return	41.27%	-22.14%
Month-to-Date Return	-6.85%	13.04%
Year-to-Date Return	19.70%	-4.76%
10-Day Avg. Volume	0.99M	2.09M
3-Month Avg. Volume	1.18M	2.52M
3-Month Volatility	22.83%	35.92%
Beta	1.05	1.20

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

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.

SWK

6.59%

Machinery Industry

Max: 34.68%
Q3: 19.06%
Median: 13.13%
Q1: 8.53%
Min: -4.87%

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.

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

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

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.

SWK

3.85%

Machinery Industry

Max: 19.74%
Q3: 11.24%
Median: 8.13%
Q1: 5.38%
Min: -1.11%

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.

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

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

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.

SWK

4.70%

Machinery Industry

Max: 26.63%
Q3: 16.15%
Median: 11.27%
Q1: 7.72%
Min: -4.91%

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.

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

Profitability at a Glance

Symbol	PWR	SWK
Return on Equity (TTM)	13.09%	6.59%
Return on Assets (TTM)	5.08%	2.63%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)	3.73%	3.85%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)	5.73%	4.70%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)	15.04%	30.03%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

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.

SWK

1.04

Machinery Industry

Max: 3.83
Q3: 2.32
Median: 1.72
Q1: 1.28
Min: 0.78

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.

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

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

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.

SWK

0.74

Machinery Industry

Max: 1.49
Q3: 0.75
Median: 0.44
Q1: 0.26
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.

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

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

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.

SWK

1.75

Machinery Industry

Max: 67.55
Q3: 33.79
Median: 13.87
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.

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

Financial Strength at a Glance

Symbol	PWR	SWK
Current Ratio (MRQ)	1.37	1.04
Quick Ratio (MRQ)	1.24	0.29
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)	0.60	0.74
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)	10.76	1.75

Growth

Revenue Growth

PWR 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

PWR 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)

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.

SWK

7.39%

Machinery Industry

Max: 5.32%
Q3: 2.84%
Median: 1.87%
Q1: 1.09%
Min: 0.00%

SWK’s Dividend Yield of 7.39% 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.

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

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

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.

SWK

148.38%

Machinery Industry

Max: 202.17%
Q3: 98.65%
Median: 55.54%
Q1: 29.03%
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.

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

Dividend at a Glance

Symbol	PWR	SWK
Dividend Yield (TTM)	0.10%	7.39%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)	5.92%	148.38%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

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.

SWK

20.08

Machinery Industry

Max: 53.66
Q3: 31.29
Median: 22.00
Q1: 16.18
Min: 7.00

SWK’s P/E Ratio of 20.08 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.

PWR 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)

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.

SWK

0.77

Machinery Industry

Max: 5.04
Q3: 2.72
Median: 1.67
Q1: 1.04
Min: 0.24

In the lower quartile for the Machinery industry, SWK’s P/S Ratio of 0.77 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.

PWR 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)

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.

SWK

1.16

Machinery Industry

Max: 7.23
Q3: 3.90
Median: 2.52
Q1: 1.47
Min: 0.49

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.

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

Valuation at a Glance

Symbol	PWR	SWK
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)	57.10	20.08
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)	2.13	0.77
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)	7.13	1.16
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)	40.85	7.08