FER vs GVA vs OMAB Stock Comparison

Ferrovial, Granite Construction and Central North Airport Prices as of Oct 26, 2026 Peers: Industry group
FER Ferrovial N.V.
$50.35 -9.8% 1M -21.8% 1Y
Market cap
$38.80B
P/E
36.1x
Revenue (TTM)
—
Div. yield
–
Engineering and Construction Industrials
2 wins
GVA Granite Construction Inc
$108.26 -6.0% 1M +3.5% 1Y
Market cap
$4.83B
P/E
–
Revenue (TTM)
$4.97B
Div. yield
0.00%
Engineering and Construction Industrials
3 wins

Head to Head

7 decided of 12

Granite Construction leads on 3 of the 12 questions below (Granite Construction 3, Ferrovial 2, Central North Airport 2). Which ones matter depends on what you are buying for; a cheap multiple and slow growth often come together.

QuestionFERGVAOMABLeader
Larger companyMarket capitalisation $38.80B $4.83B $4.78B FER
Cheaper on earningsLower P/E, profitable companies only 36.1x -29.3x 16.1x OMAB
Cheaper on forward earningsLower price / next fiscal year consensus EPS 47.1x — 15.0x OMAB
Faster revenue growthRevenue growth, trailing twelve months — +21.8% — –
More profitableNet margin, trailing twelve months — -3.3% — –
Better return on capitalReturn on invested capital — 13.4% — –
Less leveragedLower net debt / EBITDA — 1.3x — –
Higher dividend yieldTrailing dividend yield 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% –
Better 1-year returnPrice return, last 12 months -21.8% +3.5% -3.6% GVA
Better 5-year returnAnnualised price return, 5 years +11.4%/yr +22.9%/yr +15.2%/yr GVA
Less volatileAnnualised volatility, 1 year 25.4% 33.1% 31.2% FER
Higher overall scoreMean of the five percentile scores vs peers 51/100 56/100 46/100 GVA

Percentile Scorecard

FERGVAOMAB

Each axis is the mean percentile of its metrics against the company's industry group. 100 is the best in the group, 50 the middle.

Scores by Axis

AxisFERGVAOMAB
Valuation 37 #33 of 52 84 #9 of 52 28 #98 of 136
Growth – 50 #19 of 37 –
Profitability – 50 #19 of 37 –
Financial Health 34 #38 of 57 32 #39 of 57 34 #95 of 144
Shareholder Returns 81 #6 of 27 62 #11 of 27 74 #22 of 82
Overall 51 56 46
  • FER ranked among 57 companies in Construction Services
  • GVA ranked among 57 companies in Construction Services
  • OMAB ranked among 150 companies in Transportation

Price Performance

Price return, split-adjusted, before dividends. Click a name to hide or show it.

Returns

PeriodFERGVAOMABSPY
1 month -9.8%-6.0%-3.9% -0.8%
3 months -19.9%-13.8%-5.5% +3.5%
6 months -25.6%-13.9%-10.9% +7.0%
Year to date -22.1%-6.1%-9.0% +12.2%
1 year -21.8%+3.5%-3.6% +13.0%
3 years +54.9%+215.9%+74.4% +86.3%
3 years, per year +15.7%+46.8%+20.4% +23.1%
5 years +71.3%+180.3%+102.8% +68.6%
5 years, per year +11.4%+22.9%+15.2% +11.0%
10 years +137.7%+144.0%+104.2% +258.0%
10 years, per year +9.0%+9.3%+7.4% +13.6%

Risk

MeasureFERGVAOMABSPY
Volatility, 1Y 25.4%33.1%31.2% 12.7%
Downside volatility, 1Y 24.6%33.6%28.1% 12.7%
Beta vs S&P 500, 1Y 1.020.971.12 1.00
Return / volatility, 1Y -0.860.11-0.12 1.02
Max drawdown, 5Y -34.3%-40.4%-42.1% -25.4%
From 52-week high -32.3%-32.5%-26.7% -1.8%
52-week high $74.38$160.39$134.98 $779.14
52-week low $48.86$98.50$88.75 $631.97

Valuation History

Weekly multiples on trailing twelve-month fundamentals. Negative or extreme readings (a loss year, a collapsed denominator) are left out so the chart stays readable.

MultipleFERGVAOMAB
P/E now vs peer median 36.1xmedian 25.7x -28.7xmedian 25.7x 16.1xmedian 16.1x
P/S now vs peer median 3.3xmedian 0.8x 1.0xmedian 0.8x 5.4xmedian 1.0x
EV/EBITDA now vs peer median —median 12.9x 10.6xmedian 12.9x —median 8.7x
P/FCF now vs peer median 18.5xmedian 22.5x 10.0xmedian 22.5x 11.8xmedian 11.5x
P/B now vs peer median 5.2xmedian 2.3x 5.9xmedian 2.3x 7.5xmedian 1.2x
PEG now vs peer median —median 0.56 0.39median 0.56 —median 0.81

Financial History

Reported figures by fiscal period, placed on the calendar year (or quarter) each period ended in, so companies with different fiscal years line up.

Trailing twelve monthsFERGVAOMAB
Revenue – $4.97B –
Gross profit – $776.94M –
Operating income – $314.31M –
Net income – -$151.53M –
Free cash flow – $471.91M –
EPS (diluted) – $-3.77 –
Cash & equivalents $5.02B $877.12M $172.32M
Total debt $12.25B $1.56B $1.84B
Shares (diluted) 718.72M 43.75M –
Enterprise value $17.05B $2.46B $4.27B

All Metrics

58 metrics · best in bold

Bold marks the best reading: the lowest positive value for multiples, leverage and payout, the highest for everything else. The bar under each value is its percentile against that company's own peers. Hover a value for its rank and the peer median.

Valuation

12 metrics
MetricFERGVAOMAB
P/E 36.1x -28.7x 16.1x
P/FCF 18.5x 10.0x 11.8x
P/Operating cash flow – 7.8x –
P/S 3.3x 1.0x 5.4x
P/B 5.2x 5.9x 7.5x
P/Tangible book 5.3x 8.0x -9.6x
EV/EBITDA – 10.6x –
EV/EBIT – 17.1x –
EV/Revenue – 1.1x –
EV/FCF – 11.4x –
EV/Operating cash flow – 8.9x –
PEG (3Y EPS CAGR) – 0.39 –

Growth

14 metrics
MetricFERGVAOMAB
Revenue growth (1Y) – 21.8% –
Revenue CAGR (3Y) – 15.1% –
Gross profit growth (1Y) – 22.0% –
Gross profit CAGR (3Y) – 30.8% –
Operating income growth (1Y) – 37.5% –
Operating income CAGR (3Y) – 76.7% –
Net income growth (1Y) – -185.3% –
Net income CAGR (3Y) – -85.3% –
EPS growth (1Y) – -225.5% –
EPS CAGR (3Y) – -73.5% –
Operating cash flow growth (1Y) – 37.6% –
Operating cash flow CAGR (3Y) – 147.4% –
Free cash flow growth (1Y) – 52.7% –
Free cash flow CAGR (3Y) – 94.5% –

Profitability

14 metrics
MetricFERGVAOMAB
Gross margin – 15.6% –
EBITDA margin – 10.2% –
Operating margin – 6.3% –
Pretax margin – -1.3% –
Net margin – -3.3% –
FCF margin – 9.5% –
Operating cash flow margin – 12.2% –
Return on equity – -14.8% –
Return on assets – -3.3% –
Return on invested capital – 13.4% –
Return on capital employed – 16.9% –
Asset turnover – 1.2x –
Cash conversion (OCF / net income) – -4.0x –
Stock comp / revenue – 1.0% –

Financial Health

11 metrics
MetricFERGVAOMAB
Debt / assets 38.0% 32.6% 43.4%
Debt / equity 1.8x 1.9x 1.2x
Net debt / EBITDA – 1.3x –
Debt / FCF – 3.3x –
Liabilities / assets 78.5% 83.1% 63.1%
Equity / assets 21.5% 16.9% 36.9%
Interest coverage – 4.5x –
Current ratio 1.1x 1.0x 1.3x
Quick ratio 1.1x 0.9x 1.2x
Cash ratio 0.7x 0.4x 0.7x
Altman Z-score – 2.11 –

Shareholder Returns

7 metrics
MetricFERGVAOMAB
Dividend yield 2.6% 0.5% 5.5%
Net buyback yield – 1.1% –
Shareholder yield 2.6% 1.6% 5.5%
Payout ratio (earnings) – -15.0% –
Payout ratio (FCF) – 4.8% –
Dividend growth (1Y) – 0.1% –
Dividend CAGR (3Y) – -0.1% –

Analyst Estimates

Solid lines are reported fiscal-year results; dashed lines are the consensus for the years ahead. Hover a year for the analysts' high and low, and how each result compared with its estimate.

ConsensusFERGVAOMAB
Forward P/E 47.1xFY2026 – 15.0xFY2026
EPS, next fiscal year $1.07FY2026 $-3.74FY2026 $6.60FY2026
EPS growth, next FY -20.7%FY2026 -196.9%FY2026 +3.3%FY2026
EPS growth, the year after +12.1% – +28.5%
Revenue, next fiscal year $11.77BFY2026 $5.09BFY2026 $933.64MFY2026
Revenue growth, next FY +4.1%FY2026 +15.2%FY2026 +1.1%FY2026
Revenue growth, the year after -5.3% +12.2% +19.6%

Institutional Ownership

13F filings, quarter ended Jun 30, 2026
HoldersFERGVAOMAB
Held by institutions 33.2% 100.0% 12.3%
Institutions holding 337 445 163
Change in shares held, QoQ +17.5% -3.0% +5.4%
Institutions buying 208 239 77
Institutions selling 103 151 59
Buyers to sellers 2.02 1.58 1.31

Return Correlation

Daily returns, last 12 months

1.00 means two stocks move in lockstep, 0 that they move independently. Pairs below about 0.5 diversify each other.

FERGVAOMAB
FER 1.00 0.39 0.43
GVA 0.39 1.00 0.23
OMAB 0.43 0.23 1.00

Add a Peer

Largest companies in the same industry

Related Comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is bigger, FER, GVA and OMAB?

Ferrovial (FER) is the largest by market capitalisation: Ferrovial (FER) $38.80B, Granite Construction (GVA) $4.83B, Central North Airport (OMAB) $4.78B.

Which stock is cheaper, FER, GVA and OMAB?

Central North Airport (OMAB) trades on the lowest price-to-earnings ratio (Ferrovial (FER) 36.1x, Granite Construction (GVA) -29.3x, Central North Airport (OMAB) 16.1x). On next year's consensus earnings, Central North Airport (OMAB) is cheapest (Ferrovial (FER) 47.1x, Central North Airport (OMAB) 15.0x). A lower multiple can reflect slower expected growth, so read it next to the growth figures.

Which stock has performed better?

Over the past year Granite Construction (GVA) returned the most: Ferrovial (FER) -21.8%, Granite Construction (GVA) +3.5%, Central North Airport (OMAB) -3.6%. Over five years, Granite Construction (GVA) compounded fastest (Ferrovial (FER) +11.4%/yr, Granite Construction (GVA) +22.9%/yr, Central North Airport (OMAB) +15.2%/yr). Returns are price only, before dividends.

Which pays a higher dividend?

Only one of these companies pays a dividend: Ferrovial (FER) 0.00%, Granite Construction (GVA) 0.00%, Central North Airport (OMAB) 0.00%. Ferrovial (FER) and Central North Airport (OMAB) pays no regular dividend.

Which stock is riskier?

By one-year price volatility, Ferrovial (FER) has been the steadiest (Ferrovial (FER) 25.4%, Granite Construction (GVA) 33.1%, Central North Airport (OMAB) 31.2%). Volatility measures how widely the price swings, not the risk of the business.

Which is the better stock, FER, GVA and OMAB?

There is no single answer; it depends on what you are buying for. On the 12 head-to-head measures on this page, Granite Construction (GVA) leads on 3. Business Quant does not give investment advice; use the comparison as a starting point for your own research.

Data from SEC filings, exchange prices and consensus estimates, via Business Quant. Percentile scores compare each company with its own peer group, so two companies' scores are each relative to different peers unless you rank against the whole market. Price returns exclude dividends. Nothing on this page is investment advice.