Advertisement
APG vs FLR
Which Stock Would AI Choose? APi Group Corporation (APG) vs. Fluor Corporation (FLR) Stock Comparison
Key Takeaways
- APi Group (APG) delivered record full-year 2025 revenue of $7.91 billion with 12.7% year-over-year growth, driven by its recurring inspection and service-based Safety Services segment.
- Fluor Corporation (FLR) faced significant headwinds in 2025, including a $653 million adverse legal ruling, project cost overruns, and a 20% annual stock decline, though its NuScale stake monetization has strengthened its balance sheet.
- APG's business model relies on statutorily driven, recurring safety and inspection services, while FLR operates in the cyclical, capital-intensive engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) industry.
- In 2026 year-to-date, FLR shares have rebounded sharply (+31.7%), while APG has experienced more modest price movement, reflecting divergent market sentiment shifts.
- APG benefits from a "Strong Buy" analyst consensus with a $52.30 average price target, while FLR holds a "Buy" rating with a $52.44 target, suggesting both stocks carry upside potential but for different reasons.
- Both companies have active capital return programs — APG authorized a $1 billion share repurchase plan, and FLR executed $754 million in buybacks during 2025 with $1.4 billion planned for 2026.
Introduction
Comparing APG and FLR offers a compelling study in contrasts: a recurring-revenue safety and specialty services provider versus one of the world's largest engineering and construction firms. Both operate in sectors tied to infrastructure and industrial activity, yet their business models, risk profiles, and recent stock trajectories diverge meaningfully. This comparison is particularly relevant for investors weighing stability and predictable growth against cyclical recovery plays with substantial embedded optionality. In the current market environment — characterized by evolving tariff policies, shifting capital spending priorities, and renewed interest in nuclear energy — understanding how APG and FLR stack up can help inform allocation decisions across different risk appetites.
APG Overview and Recent Performance
APG, or APi Group Corporation, is a global provider of fire and life safety, security, elevator and escalator, and specialty services, operating through two segments: Safety Services and Specialty Services. Headquartered in New Brighton, Minnesota, the company serves critical infrastructure, advanced manufacturing, healthcare, and high-tech end markets. APG's business model benefits from statutorily mandated inspection and maintenance requirements, which generate a recurring revenue stream that provides a degree of insulation from economic cycles.
In recent quarters, APG has posted consistently strong financial results. Full-year 2025 revenue reached a record $7.91 billion, representing 12.7% growth year-over-year, with organic growth of 7.9%. Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) rose 16.6% to $1.04 billion, and the company achieved its "13/60/80" financial targets — referring to a 13% adjusted EBITDA margin, 60% gross margin, and 80% free cash flow conversion. The company executed a three-for-two stock split in mid-2025 and authorized a $1 billion share repurchase program. In recent weeks, APG's stock has traded near the $39–$40 range, down from a 52-week high of $49.99, partly reflecting broader market rotation and profit-taking after a strong multi-year run. Nonetheless, the analyst consensus remains a "Strong Buy," with a 12-month price target of $52.30, and the company has introduced new long-term targets under its "10/16/60+" framework, signaling confidence in continued margin expansion and organic growth.
FLR Overview and Recent Performance
FLR, or Fluor Corporation, is a global engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) giant headquartered in Irving, Texas. The company delivers large-scale infrastructure, energy, and government projects through three primary segments: Urban Solutions, Energy Solutions, and Mission Solutions. With a backlog of $25.5 billion as of year-end 2025 — 81% of which is reimbursable — Fluor maintains a substantial pipeline of contracted work across diverse geographies and end markets.
Fluor's 2025 was marked by turbulence. The company reported full-year revenue of $15.5 billion, down 5% from the prior year, and a GAAP net loss attributable to Fluor of $51 million. Adjusted EBITDA came in at $504 million, and adjusted EPS (earnings per share) was $2.19. The year was defined by several headwinds: an adverse $653 million legal ruling related to the Santos project, cost overruns and scheduling delays on major infrastructure projects including the Gordie Howe Bridge and Texas highways, and a class-action lawsuit alleging misleading disclosures. These challenges contributed to a roughly 20% stock price decline during 2025. However, Fluor's investment in NuScale Power, a developer of small modular nuclear reactors, has emerged as a significant asset. The company monetized $605 million of its NuScale stake in 2025 and received an additional $1.35 billion in early 2026, with full monetization expected by mid-2026. Activist investor Starboard Value's nearly 5% stake acquisition has also drawn attention to Fluor's value-unlocking potential. In 2026, FLR shares have rebounded over 31% year-to-date, recently trading near $52, reflecting improved sentiment around capital returns and NuScale monetization.
Trending AI Robots
Navigating the complexities of stock selection between two fundamentally different companies like APG and FLR is precisely the kind of challenge that quantitative, AI-driven tools are designed to address. Tickeron's Trending AI Robots page offers a curated selection of AI-powered trading bots, each trained to identify and act on pattern-based opportunities across thousands of different tickers. While Tickeron hosts hundreds of AI trading bots, only those demonstrating the strongest alignment with current market conditions earn a place in this featured section. These bots span a wide spectrum of trading styles — from short-term momentum strategies to longer-duration trend-following approaches — and their performance statistics, including win rates and trade frequency, vary based on the specific strategy and sector focus. Whether a bot is configured for mean-reversion in industrial stocks or breakout detection in construction services, the platform surfaces only those with proven adaptability to prevailing market dynamics. Explore the Trending AI Robots page to discover which automated strategies are currently positioned to capitalize on opportunities like those presented by APG and FLR.
Head-to-Head Comparison
While both APG and FLR operate at the intersection of infrastructure and services, their fundamental profiles diverge across several key dimensions. APG's revenue model is anchored in recurring inspection, service, and monitoring contracts — statutorily mandated in many jurisdictions — providing relatively predictable cash flows and insulation from project-specific disruptions. FLR, by contrast, derives revenue from large-scale, multi-year EPC contracts that are inherently lumpy, subject to cost-overrun risk, and sensitive to commodity price fluctuations and trade policy shifts.
In terms of scale, FLR's revenue base is roughly twice that of APG, yet APG commands a market capitalization more than double FLR's — approximately $17.1 billion versus $7.3 billion — reflecting the market's willingness to assign a higher valuation multiple to APG's recurring-revenue, higher-margin business model. APG's enterprise-value-to-EBITDA ratio sits near 22x, whereas FLR trades at approximately 11x, underscoring the valuation gap between a steady compounder and a cyclical recovery play.
Growth dynamics also differ meaningfully. APG has demonstrated consistent organic growth (7.9% in 2025) supplemented by an active mergers and acquisitions (M&A) strategy. FLR's growth narrative is more dependent on new award momentum and the resolution of legacy project challenges. Recent weeks have seen FLR's backlog stabilize and new awards skew heavily toward lower-risk reimbursable contracts — 87% of 2025 new awards were reimbursable — a strategic shift that may reduce earnings volatility over time.
Risk profiles present a clear trade-off. APG's primary risks include integration challenges from its acquisition-heavy strategy and exposure to commercial construction cycles in its Specialty Services segment. FLR's risks are more acute: project execution issues, legal liabilities, and the political sensitivity of tariff policies that affect materials costs. On the catalyst front, APG's margin expansion story and capital return program offer steady upside, while FLR's NuScale monetization and activist investor involvement present higher-impact, binary catalysts.
Tickeron AI Verdict
Based on observable trend consistency, earnings stability, and relative market positioning, Tickeron's AI-driven analytical framework would likely tilt in favor of APG under current conditions. APG's combination of record revenue growth, expanding adjusted EBITDA margins, a recurring-revenue backbone, and a well-defined capital allocation strategy presents the kind of steady, trend-consistent profile that algorithmic models tend to favor. FLR, while offering a potentially higher-reward recovery narrative driven by NuScale monetization and activist pressure, carries greater fundamental volatility — negative GAAP earnings in 2025, project execution uncertainties, and a more disrupted trend structure. That said, for risk-tolerant investors and momentum-oriented strategies, FLR's sharp 2026 rebound and the tangible catalyst of its NuScale divestiture could register favorably in shorter-duration AI models. In probabilistic terms, APG currently exhibits the stronger alignment with the characteristics most AI trading systems prioritize: trend persistence, fundamental consistency, and lower downside deviation.
Disclaimer
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.
To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is APG is a StrongBuy and FLR is a Buy.
Long-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).
APG’s FA Score shows that 2 FA rating(s) are green whileFLR’s FA Score has 1 green FA rating(s).
- APG’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
- FLR’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
Short-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.
If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.
APG’s TA Score shows that 4 TA indicator(s) are bullish while FLR’s TA Score has 5 bullish TA indicator(s).
- APG’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
- FLR’s TA Score: 5 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
APG (@Engineering & Construction) experienced а +1.40% price change this week, while FLR (@Engineering & Construction) price change was +4.47% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Engineering & Construction industry was -3.15%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -12.81%, and the average quarterly price growth was -3.48%.
Reported Earning Dates
APG is expected to report earnings on Jul 30, 2026.
FLR is expected to report earnings on Aug 07, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Engineering & Construction (-3.15% weekly)Engineering & Construction includes companies that engage in non-residential construction and contract services, including ventilation, heating and air conditioning (HVAC) services. The level/value of construction & engineering activity is one of the potentially relevant indicators of the health of businesses, and hence of the overall economy. Some of the large-cap U.S. companies in this industry include Jacobs Engineering Group Inc,, AECOM and Quanta Services, Inc.
| APG | FLR | APG / FLR | |
| Capitalization | 17.3B | 7.22B | 240% |
| EBITDA | 902M | -206M | -438% |
| Gain YTD | 4.365 | 30.457 | 14% |
| P/E Ratio | 125.36 | 23.61 | 531% |
| Revenue | 8.17B | 15.2B | 54% |
| Total Cash | 645M | 3.67B | 18% |
| Total Debt | 3.07B | 1.07B | 287% |
APG | FLR | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 71 | 84 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 89 Overvalued | 67 Overvalued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 17 | 42 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 95 | 69 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 60 | 50 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 13 | 5 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 50 |
Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.
FLR's Valuation (67) in the Engineering And Construction industry is in the same range as APG (89) in the null industry. This means that FLR’s stock grew similarly to APG’s over the last 12 months.
APG's Profit vs Risk Rating (17) in the null industry is in the same range as FLR (42) in the Engineering And Construction industry. This means that APG’s stock grew similarly to FLR’s over the last 12 months.
FLR's SMR Rating (69) in the Engineering And Construction industry is in the same range as APG (95) in the null industry. This means that FLR’s stock grew similarly to APG’s over the last 12 months.
FLR's Price Growth Rating (50) in the Engineering And Construction industry is in the same range as APG (60) in the null industry. This means that FLR’s stock grew similarly to APG’s over the last 12 months.
FLR's P/E Growth Rating (5) in the Engineering And Construction industry is in the same range as APG (13) in the null industry. This means that FLR’s stock grew similarly to APG’s over the last 12 months.
| APG | FLR | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 84% | 4 days ago 70% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 76% | 4 days ago 70% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 62% | 4 days ago 80% |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 59% | 4 days ago 76% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 58% | 4 days ago 79% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 63% | 4 days ago 61% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 71% | 5 days ago 76% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 58% | 11 days ago 64% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 75% | 4 days ago 72% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 4 days ago 69% | 4 days ago 80% |
Advertisement
APG and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, APG has been loosely correlated with IESC. These tickers have moved in lockstep 53% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if APG jumps, then IESC could also see price increases.
| Ticker / NAME | Correlation To APG | 1D Price Change % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| APG | 100% | +0.91% | ||
| IESC - APG | 53% Loosely correlated | -3.65% | ||
| FIX - APG | 52% Loosely correlated | -0.18% | ||
| MTZ - APG | 47% Loosely correlated | -0.31% | ||
| STRL - APG | 47% Loosely correlated | -3.98% | ||
| ECG - APG | 45% Loosely correlated | -1.87% | ||
More | ||||
FLR and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, FLR has been loosely correlated with MTZ. These tickers have moved in lockstep 52% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if FLR jumps, then MTZ could also see price increases.