Seek Returns logo

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

Updated on

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

Company Profile

SymbolPWRVRSK
Company NameQuanta Services, Inc.Verisk Analytics, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorIndustrialsIndustrials
GICS IndustryConstruction & EngineeringProfessional Services
Market Capitalization56.85 billion USD37.40 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENasdaqGS
Listing DateFebruary 12, 1998October 7, 2009
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

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

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolPWRVRSK
5-Day Price Return0.89%-1.55%
13-Week Price Return11.45%-15.33%
26-Week Price Return41.65%-9.29%
52-Week Price Return40.79%-0.10%
Month-to-Date Return-6.05%-3.95%
Year-to-Date Return20.73%-2.81%
10-Day Avg. Volume0.90M1.04M
3-Month Avg. Volume1.18M0.94M
3-Month Volatility21.99%21.25%
Beta1.040.87

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.

VRSK

439.17%

Professional Services Industry

Max
52.17%
Q3
30.06%
Median
22.21%
Q1
11.67%
Min
-13.44%

VRSK’s Return on Equity of 439.17% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Professional Services industry. This demonstrates a superior ability to generate profit from shareholder investments, though it could also be inflated by high financial leverage.

PWR vs. VRSK: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Professional Services 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.

VRSK

30.67%

Professional Services Industry

Max
26.06%
Q3
13.34%
Median
7.88%
Q1
3.50%
Min
-2.93%

VRSK’s Net Profit Margin of 30.67% is exceptionally high, placing it well beyond the typical range for the Professional Services industry. This demonstrates outstanding operational efficiency and a strong competitive advantage in converting revenue into profit.

PWR vs. VRSK: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Professional Services 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.

VRSK

43.94%

Professional Services Industry

Max
35.84%
Q3
19.38%
Median
12.54%
Q1
7.36%
Min
-5.21%

VRSK’s Operating Profit Margin of 43.94% is exceptionally high, placing it well above the typical range for the Professional Services industry. This demonstrates outstanding efficiency in managing its core operations, which can be a result of strong pricing power or superior cost control.

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

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolPWRVRSK
Return on Equity (TTM)13.09%439.17%
Return on Assets (TTM)5.08%19.55%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)3.73%30.67%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)5.73%43.94%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)15.04%69.39%

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.

VRSK

1.53

Professional Services Industry

Max
2.45
Q3
1.65
Median
1.26
Q1
1.10
Min
0.47

VRSK’s Current Ratio of 1.53 aligns with the median group of the Professional Services industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

PWR vs. VRSK: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Professional Services 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.

VRSK

10.43

Professional Services Industry

Max
2.63
Q3
1.44
Median
0.91
Q1
0.49
Min
0.00

With a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 10.43, VRSK operates with exceptionally high leverage compared to the Professional Services industry norm. This suggests an aggressive reliance on debt financing, which can magnify returns but also significantly elevates financial risk.

PWR vs. VRSK: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Professional Services 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.

VRSK

43.51

Professional Services Industry

Max
39.67
Q3
20.05
Median
11.07
Q1
5.36
Min
-2.22

With an Interest Coverage Ratio of 43.51, VRSK demonstrates a superior capacity to service its debt, placing it well above the typical range for the Professional Services industry. This stems from either robust earnings or a conservative debt load.

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

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolPWRVRSK
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.371.53
Quick Ratio (MRQ)1.241.44
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)0.6010.43
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)10.7643.51

Growth

Revenue Growth

PWR vs. VRSK: 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. VRSK: 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.

VRSK

0.62%

Professional Services Industry

Max
5.28%
Q3
2.51%
Median
1.63%
Q1
0.62%
Min
0.00%

VRSK’s Dividend Yield of 0.62% is consistent with its peers in the Professional Services industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

PWR vs. VRSK: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Professional Services 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.

VRSK

25.76%

Professional Services Industry

Max
109.23%
Q3
64.39%
Median
47.00%
Q1
20.35%
Min
0.00%

VRSK’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 25.76% is within the typical range for the Professional Services industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

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

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolPWRVRSK
Dividend Yield (TTM)0.10%0.62%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)5.92%25.76%

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.

VRSK

41.55

Professional Services Industry

Max
49.59
Q3
36.59
Median
28.13
Q1
18.55
Min
10.07

A P/E Ratio of 41.55 places VRSK in the upper quartile for the Professional Services industry. This high valuation relative to peers suggests the market holds elevated expectations for the company’s future growth.

PWR vs. VRSK: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Professional Services 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.

VRSK

12.75

Professional Services Industry

Max
9.54
Q3
5.11
Median
2.10
Q1
0.75
Min
0.11

With a P/S Ratio of 12.75, VRSK trades at a valuation that eclipses even the highest in the Professional Services industry. This implies the market has priced in exceptionally optimistic scenarios for future revenue growth, posing considerable valuation risk.

PWR vs. VRSK: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Professional Services 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.

VRSK

139.79

Professional Services Industry

Max
13.75
Q3
8.87
Median
4.35
Q1
2.43
Min
0.54

At 139.79, VRSK’s P/B Ratio is at an extreme premium to the Professional Services 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 vs. VRSK: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against their respective Construction & Engineering and Professional Services industry benchmarks.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolPWRVRSK
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)57.1041.55
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)2.1312.75
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)7.13139.79
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)40.8537.30