Balfour Beatty holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across growth and stability. AECOM does not offset that deficit through any equally strong structural edge elsewhere. On the market side, Balfour Beatty is in better shape — its trend is intact while AECOM's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — Balfour Beatty's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
This is not just a one-metric split: both growth and stability materially support the lead. Balfour Beatty plc leads by 27 points on the overall comparison score.
Both operate in: Engineering & Construction
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. ACM and BBY.L share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how AECOM and Balfour Beatty each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
Score differences across key dimensions.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
The price setup looks more supportive for Balfour Beatty plc, but AECOM still has the stronger structure.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
One company is still expanding while the other is contracting, which creates a very wide growth split.
Stability adds another layer of support rather than leaving the result tied to growth alone.
The lead is built on both growth and stability, making it broader than a single-dimension result.
Break down the ACM vs BBY.L comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how ACM and BBY.L each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.