PWR vs. ACM
PWR (Quanta Services, Inc.) and ACM (AECOM) are both stocks. Both operate in the Engineering & Construction industry within the Industrials sector. Over the past 10 years, PWR returned 39.06%/yr vs 8.11%/yr for ACM. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently.
Performance
PWR vs. ACM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PWR achieves a 58.22% return, which is significantly higher than ACM's -23.21% return. Over the past 10 years, PWR has outperformed ACM with an annualized return of 39.06%, while ACM has yielded a comparatively lower 8.11% annualized return.
PWR
- 1D
- 1.43%
- 1M
- -0.14%
- 6M
- 40.66%
- YTD
- 58.22%
- 1Y
- 69.02%
- 3Y*
- 49.15%
- 5Y*
- 49.23%
- 10Y*
- 39.06%
- ALL TIME*
- 17.25%
ACM
- 1D
- 0.88%
- 1M
- 6.86%
- 6M
- -24.32%
- YTD
- -23.21%
- 1Y
- -33.96%
- 3Y*
- -5.10%
- 5Y*
- 3.81%
- 10Y*
- 8.11%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.88%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
ACM AECOM | $114.65M | $108.13M | $146.64M |
| $832.20M | $746.35M | $898.56M |
PWR vs. ACM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PWR Quanta Services, Inc. | 58.22% | 33.70% | 46.60% | 51.70% | 24.63% | 59.50% | 77.74% | 35.84% | -22.93% | 12.22% |
ACM AECOM | -23.21% | -9.91% | 16.67% | 9.77% | 10.72% | 55.38% | 15.42% | 62.75% | -28.67% | 2.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between PWR and ACM is 0.25, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.25 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.55 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2007 | 0.59 |
Over the past year, the correlation between PWR and ACM has dropped to 0.25 - well below their long-term average of 0.59, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
Fundamentals
PWR:
$100.14B
ACM:
$9.30B
PWR:
$8.81
ACM:
$3.83
PWR:
75.79
ACM:
18.89
PWR:
3.76
ACM:
0.11
PWR:
3.09
ACM:
0.60
PWR:
10.56
ACM:
4.16
PWR:
$32.78B
ACM:
$15.99B
PWR:
$4.73B
ACM:
$1.24B
PWR:
$3.04B
ACM:
$976.83M
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PWR vs. ACM — Risk / Return Rank
PWR
ACM
PWR vs. ACM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Quanta Services, Inc. (PWR) and AECOM (ACM). 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.
| PWR | ACM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.55 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 0.81 | +0.48 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.27 | -0.71 | +2.98 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.09 | -1.14 | +10.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PWR vs. ACM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PWR drawdown since its inception was -97.07%, which is greater than ACM's maximum drawdown of -59.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWR and ACM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PWR | ACM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -97.07% | -59.97% | -37.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -28.53% | -49.67% | +21.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.89% | -49.67% | +15.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.89% | -49.67% | +15.78% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.53% | -54.12% | +8.59% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.00% | -45.51% | +30.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -46.69% | -18.68% | -28.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.35% | 30.61% | -23.26% |
Volatility
PWR vs. ACM - Volatility Comparison
Quanta Services, Inc. (PWR) has a higher volatility of 19.77% compared to AECOM (ACM) at 9.16%. This indicates that PWR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PWR | ACM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 19.77% | 9.16% | +10.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 35.51% | 27.86% | +7.65% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.07% | 33.60% | +9.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.03% | 26.87% | +10.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.42% | 31.06% | +3.36% |
Dividends
PWR vs. ACM - Dividend Comparison
PWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than ACM's 1.64% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACM AECOM | 1.64% | 1.09% | 0.82% | 0.78% | 0.71% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PWR Quanta Services, Inc. | 0.06% | 0.09% | 0.09% | 0.15% | 0.25% | 0.16% | 0.29% | 0.42% | 0.13% |
Financials
PWR vs. ACM - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Quanta Services, Inc. and AECOM. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
PWR vs. ACM - Profitability Comparison
PWR - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Quanta Services, Inc. reported a gross profit of 1.55B and revenue of 9.56B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 16.2%.
ACM - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, AECOM reported a gross profit of 296.50M and revenue of 3.80B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 7.8%.
PWR - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Quanta Services, Inc. reported an operating income of 694.83M and revenue of 9.56B, resulting in an operating margin of 7.3%.
ACM - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, AECOM reported an operating income of 229.65M and revenue of 3.80B, resulting in an operating margin of 6.0%.
PWR - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Quanta Services, Inc. reported a net income of 451.38M and revenue of 9.56B, resulting in a net margin of 4.7%.
ACM - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, AECOM reported a net income of 179.86M and revenue of 3.80B, resulting in a net margin of 4.7%.
Frequently Asked Questions
PWR and ACM have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PWR has higher volatility (19.77%) compared to ACM (9.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWR dropped -97.07% vs ACM's -59.97%.
PWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs -1.04), 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.
Find the right allocation for PWR and ACM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer