FCN vs. BWMN

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

FCN (FTI Consulting, Inc.) and BWMN (Bowman Consulting Group Ltd.) are both stocks. Both operate in the Consulting Services industry within the Industrials sector. Over the past 5 years, FCN returned 0.93%/yr vs 16.82%/yr for BWMN. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

FCN vs. BWMN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FTI Consulting, Inc. (FCN) and Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCN achieves a -17.46% return, which is significantly lower than BWMN's -10.21% return.

FCN

• 1D: -3.15%
• 1M: -8.50%
• YTD: -17.46%
• 6M: -21.07%
• 1Y: -11.19%
• 3Y*: -9.18%
• 5Y*: 0.93%
• 10Y*: 13.36%

BWMN

• 1D: -1.76%
• 1M: -6.56%
• YTD: -10.21%
• 6M: -12.49%
• 1Y: 10.80%
• 3Y*: -1.00%
• 5Y*: 16.82%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FCN vs. BWMN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FCN FTI Consulting, Inc.	-17.46%	-10.62%	-4.03%	25.41%	3.51%	6.18%
BWMN Bowman Consulting Group Ltd.	-10.21%	32.34%	-29.76%	62.56%	2.85%	51.75%

Correlation

The correlation between FCN and BWMN is 0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.14
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2021	0.08

Fundamentals

EPS FCN : $10.96 BWMN : $0.64
PE Ratio FCN : 12.86 BWMN : 46.68
PEG Ratio FCN : 2.36 BWMN : 0.10
PS Ratio FCN : 0.89 BWMN : 1.31
Total Revenue (TTM) FCN : $3.87B BWMN : $377.09M
Gross Profit (TTM) FCN : $1.23B BWMN : $175.89M
EBITDA (TTM) FCN : $462.64M BWMN : $42.71M

Return for Risk

FCN vs. BWMN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FCN

FCN Risk / Return Rank: 21
FCN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
FCN Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
FCN Omega Ratio Rank: 22
FCN Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
FCN Martin Ratio Rank: 11

BWMN

BWMN Risk / Return Rank: 48
BWMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
BWMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
BWMN Omega Ratio Rank: 47
BWMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
BWMN Martin Ratio Rank: 48

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FCN vs. BWMN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FTI Consulting, Inc. (FCN) and Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	FCN	BWMN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.41	0.23	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.40	0.61	-1.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.09	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.46	0.27	-0.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.32	0.51	-1.83

FCN vs. BWMN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCN Sharpe Ratio is -0.41, which is lower than the BWMN Sharpe Ratio of 0.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCN and BWMN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FCN vs. BWMN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCN drawdown since its inception was -88.02%, which is greater than BWMN's maximum drawdown of -56.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCN and BWMN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCN	BWMN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.02%	-56.21%	-31.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.61%	-39.93%	+15.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.96%	-56.21%	+17.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.96%	-56.21%	+17.25%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.96%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.96%	-33.27%	-5.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.30%	-20.71%	-9.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.50%	21.12%	-12.62%

Volatility

FCN vs. BWMN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FTI Consulting, Inc. (FCN) is 7.35%, while Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) has a volatility of 10.31%. This indicates that FCN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BWMN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCN	BWMN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.35%	10.31%	-2.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.86%	30.49%	-7.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.51%	46.46%	-18.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.13%	47.10%	-17.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.54%	46.92%	-16.38%

Dividends

FCN vs. BWMN - Dividend Comparison

Neither FCN nor BWMN has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Financials

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCN and BWMN in my portfolio?

FCN and BWMN have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FCN or BWMN?

BWMN has higher volatility (10.31%) compared to FCN (7.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCN dropped -88.02% vs BWMN's -56.21%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BWMN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.23 vs -0.41), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.