For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Ferrovial SE (FER) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.
Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-23): Designation Low · Gem Score -26 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 33 · Value -75 · Sentiment 25 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $28.66 vs $63.92 at analysis
Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable
reference-name attribute you can cite):
profile-header/price-overview— company profile, live quote, market capextended-analysis— the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memofuture-predictions— our forward price-band predictionsmarket-narrative/ai-findings/gpt-critique— narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)- Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers):
price-history,income-trend,key-metrics,financials(statement tables),insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.
More for machine readers: site briefing at
/llms.txt ·
any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER ·
raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds);
every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.
Ferrovial SE
FER NASDAQFerrovial SE is a multinational infrastructure company specializing in the design, construction, financing, operation, and maintenance of transportation and urban services worldwide. Operating through four key segments—Construction, Toll Roads, Airports, and Energy Infrastructures and Mobility—it develops and manages essential assets like highways, airports, power transmission lines, and renewable energy plants. Notable projects include the 407 ETR in Canada, LBJ Express and North Tarrant Express in the US, Heathrow expansions in the UK, and initiatives in sustainable mobility such as vertiports for urban air transport. Founded in 1952, Ferrovial SE employs over 25,000 people and maintains a strong presence in more than 20 countries, emphasizing innovation, operational excellence, and sustainability. Its integrated business model covers the full project lifecycle, supporting resilient communities and economic growth through complex, large-scale endeavors in engineering and construction within the industrials sector.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
This company does not file structured financial statements with the U.S. SEC, so quarterly figures aren't available from our filings-based data engine. Annual figures shown here come from the sources that do cover it.
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 1.44
Total Equity: $8.89B
Shares: 718,716,000
Total Debt: $1.24B
Cash: $4.95B
EBITDA: N/A
Total Debt: $1.24B
Cash: $4.95B
Revenue: $11.16B
Revenue: $11.16B
Revenue: $11.16B
Total Equity: $8.89B
Tax Rate: -5.6%
Equity: $8.89B
Total Debt: $1.24B
Cash: $4.95B
Current Liabilities: $7.49B
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $1.24B
Total Equity: $8.89B
Shares: 718,716,000
Shares: 718,716,000
CapEx: $0.00
Shares: 718,716,000
Stock Price: $63.92
Net Income: $1.03B
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 18, 2026 12:21am (5d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $8.8B | $9.9B | $10.6B | $11.2B |
| Cost of Revenue | — | — | — | — |
| Gross Profit | — | — | — | — |
| Operating Expenses | $7.9B | $8.7B | $9.0B | $9.5B |
| Operating Income | $490.4M | $724.6M | $3.6B | — |
| Net Income | $218.0M | $395.3M | $3.8B | $1.0B |
| EBITDA | $837.0M | $1.2B | $4.1B | — |
| EPS | $0.29 | $0.53 | $5.18 | $1.44 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $0.29 | $0.53 | $5.18 | $1.44 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 18, 2026 12:21am (5d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | $5.9B | $5.6B | $5.6B | $5.6B | $5.0B |
| Total Current Assets | — | $8.1B | $8.9B | $8.9B | $8.5B |
| Total Assets | — | $30.5B | $33.6B | $33.6B | $31.8B |
| Current Liabilities | — | $6.7B | $7.3B | $7.3B | $7.5B |
| Long-Term Debt | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total Liabilities | — | $23.7B | $24.2B | $24.2B | $22.9B |
| Total Equity | $7.5B | $6.8B | $9.4B | $9.4B | $8.9B |
| Retained Earnings | — | — | — | — | — |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 18, 2026 12:21am (5d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $1.2B | $1.5B | $1.5B | $2.2B |
| Capital Expenditure | — | — | — | — |
| Free Cash Flow | — | — | — | — |
| Acquisitions (net) | — | — | — | — |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | $628.4M | $251.6M | -$587.8M | $117.1M |
| Dividends Paid | — | — | — | — |
| Stock Buybacks | — | — | — | — |
| Net Change in Cash | -$470.7M | -$395.3M | $45.2M | -$645.7M |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 18, 2026 12:21am (5d ago)| Metric | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | +12.8% | +7.4% | +5.2% |
| Gross Profit Growth | — | — | — |
| Operating Income Growth | +47.8% | +397.4% | — |
| Net Income Growth | +81.4% | +849.9% | -72.6% |
| EBITDA Growth | +42.1% | +246.0% | — |
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 12, 2026 10:18am (11d ago)| Date | Dividend | Declaration | Record | Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-19 | $0.65 | — | — | — |
| 2025-12-05 | $0.09 | — | — | — |
| 2025-10-27 | $0.55 | — | — | — |
| 2025-05-23 | $0.32 | — | — | — |
| 2024-12-16 | $0.04 | — | — | — |
| 2024-11-07 | $0.49 | — | — | — |
| 2024-05-20 | $0.33 | — | — | — |
Deep Analysis
Narrative Economics
market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-18AI-driven electricity demand (data centers, grid reinforcement) feeds the Energy Infrastructures & Mobility segment and US transmission/heavy civil pipeline, while machine-learning dynamic pricing on managed lanes (LBJ, NTE, 407-style tolling) extracts more revenue per vehicle from a fixed asset without new capex.
Traffic-demand composition is the exposed variable: persistent AI-enabled remote/hybrid work suppresses peak-hour commuting exactly where premium managed-lane tolls are earned, and future autonomous fleets could negotiate volume tolling or route-optimize around priced lanes.
Whether peak-period paid trips and revenue-per-transaction on the US managed lanes keep compounding above inflation; observable in quarterly toll revenue per transaction versus traffic volume splits.
Long-dated concession contracts with contractual/inflation-linked pricing, land and right-of-way, airport slots, prequalification for mega-projects, and the balance sheet plus P3 political relationships needed to win them.
AI Lens thesis
AI reaches Ferrovial almost entirely through second-order channels, not through substitution of its product: nobody can generate a highway, an airport concession or a transmission corridor with cheaper software, so the scarce assets get relatively rarer as information work commoditizes. Inside the firm, AI compresses design, estimating, BIM clash detection, claims and predictive maintenance costs — meaningful in a construction segment running mid-single-digit margins, but competitive bidding will hand much of that back to public clients, so margin conversion is partial. The genuinely valuable AI mechanism is pricing: unregulated managed lanes monetize willingness-to-pay in real time, and better traffic/elasticity models on a fixed asset are near-pure margin. The genuine risk is demand mix, not disintermediation — if AI keeps knowledge workers off the peak-hour commute, the highest-yield toll windows thin out even as total mobility grows.
What the market may be underestimating
Upside The energy-infrastructure and transmission arm is a direct AI-capex beneficiary that the market still classes as low-margin construction; a rerating of that backlog mix is not priced into an E&C multiple.
Downside Managed-lane economics depend on congestion scarcity — AV platooning and AI traffic management that raise free-lane throughput would erode the very congestion Ferrovial sells relief from.
Outcome range spread 34
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-18 01:25The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.
Claude Reading
The raw numbers tell a schizophrenic story that the models are partially misreading. Reported 2024 net income of $3.76B on $10.6B revenue is not operating earnings — it's contaminated by the 407 ETR partial disposal gain (Ferrovial sold a 5% stake in 2024 at a valuation implying ~$30B+ for the full asset). Strip that out and 2025's $1.03B NI on $11.16B revenue is the truer run-rate, giving a real P/E closer to 45x on GAAP but with the caveat that GAAP dramatically understates concession economics because 407 ETR is equity-accounted at book, not at market value. The earnings CAGR of 61% and recent YoY of -72.6% are both artifacts of that disposal — neither is signal. Operating cash flow of $2.23B on a $46B market cap is a 4.8% cash yield, which for a concession portfolio with 50+ year residual lives and CPI-linked toll escalators is not obviously mispriced.
The synthesis verdict of $28.98 fair value (-54.7%) is almost certainly wrong in direction, and here's why: a DCF on Ferrovial's consolidated financials systematically undercounts the 407 ETR because Ferrovial owns 43.23% and equity-accounts it — the toll road's ~$1B+ in annual distributable cash barely shows up in consolidated OCF. Private market comps are the relevant anchor: the 2024 stake sale valued 407 ETR alone at roughly $13-14B for Ferrovial's share, and Heathrow, AGS airports, and the US managed lanes (LBJ, NTE, I-66) plausibly add another $8-12B in NAV. That's $21-26B just in concession NAV against a $46B market cap, leaving $20-25B for construction (Budimex + Webber + Ferrovial Construction, generating ~$8B revenue) and net cash of $3.7B. Construction at 0.3-0.5x sales is $2.5-4B; the residual gap of ~$15B is what you're paying for pipeline optionality (NTE 35W extensions, new managed lanes, vertiports). Rich, yes. 120% overvalued, no.
The contrarian case the models miss cuts the other way too: European infrastructure comps (Vinci, Eiffage, Atlantia-take-private at ~10x EBITDA) don't trade at 44x earnings, and Ferrovial's Nasdaq listing hype (achieved Q1 2024) has already been harvested. Interest rates matter enormously for concession NAVs — a 100bp move in long rates re-rates 407 ETR by 15-20%. The thesis eval's -4 score (essentially balanced) is closer to right than the synthesis's -54.7% scream. The narrative layer correctly identifies "platform-monopoly" framing but the "anchored" designation is generous — at 5.2x book and 4.1x sales for a business whose organic revenue growth is 5-6%, you're paying explicitly for the story that governments keep privatizing and Ferrovial keeps winning bids.
Where I dissent from the synthesis: fair value is not $29, it's $50-58 on sum-of-parts using private market marks, which still leaves the stock 10-20% overvalued but not catastrophically so. Where I agree with the bears: the construction business genuinely destroys value on a risk-adjusted basis (Budimex margins are thin, US construction is competitive), and management's refusal to spin it despite years of pressure signals empire preservation over shareholder returns. The 2.58% dividend yield is thin for an "infrastructure" stock — Vinci pays 4%+, Enbridge 6%+ — telling you the market is paying for growth optionality it may not receive. Balance sheet is pristine (net cash $3.7B, D/E 0.14), which cushions downside but also means capital is under-deployed. I'd want to see this at $52-55 before committing; at $64 you're paying a full narrative premium on a business whose only genuinely premium asset (407 ETR) is a 43% stake, not a controlling one.
GPT Reading
The raw numbers say Ferrovial is not a normal 44x P/E industrial, and that is exactly why a simple screen calling it egregiously overvalued can be misleading. Revenue has climbed steadily from $8.75B in 2022 to $9.87B in 2023, $10.60B in 2024, and $11.16B in 2025, a respectable 6.3% CAGR for a company of this size. More important, operating cash flow reached $2.23B in 2025 against just $1.03B of net income, while the balance sheet is plainly overcapitalized rather than strained: $4.95B of cash versus $1.24B of debt, or roughly $3.7B of net cash. For a business tied to long-duration concessions and infrastructure stakes, that balance sheet matters more than headline earnings. The market cap is $46.1B, so you are paying for asset quality and cash-flow resilience, but the enterprise value is lower than the equity value because of the net cash; EV/revenue at 3.78x is rich for construction, yet not absurd for scarce toll-road and airport exposure.
What stands out most is how distorted the income statement appears from year to year. Net income went from $218M in 2022 to $395M in 2023, then exploded to $3.76B in 2024 before dropping back to $1.03B in 2025. That is not the profile of a business you should value off a single trailing earnings multiple. The 2024 operating profit of $3.60B against $10.60B of revenue implies a 34% operating margin, then 2025 net margin falls to 9.2% on $11.16B of revenue. Those swings strongly suggest asset-sale, revaluation, or concession-related accounting noise rather than a genuine collapse in underlying economics. If that reading is right, the 44.5x P/E is overstating expensiveness because the “E” is not normalized; conversely, the 2024 earnings boom also overstates profitability if used by bulls. My own read is that Ferrovial should be thought of as a premium infrastructure holding company with a construction arm attached, not as either a plain contractor or a clean annuity. That deserves a premium to industrials, but not an anything-goes multiple.
At $63.92, I think the stock is more fairly valued to mildly overvalued than dramatically overvalued. Price-to-sales of 4.1x and price-to-book of 5.17x are demanding for a company whose reported revenue is only growing mid-single digits and whose ROE is 11.6%, not exceptional enough on its own to justify a huge premium. But the company also has net cash, a 2.6% dividend yield, and the kind of assets that public markets rarely get direct access to. A business generating $2.23B of operating cash flow on an $46B equity valuation is not cheap, yet it is also not obviously a bubble if a meaningful share of value sits in unconsolidated concessions or mature assets with inflation-linked economics. My base case is that the market is right to reject the very low fair values implied by formulaic models, but wrong to price Ferrovial as if all of its infrastructure optionality will compound at high rates from here. That leaves the stock looking closer to a full valuation in the high $50s than a bargain or a disaster.
The best argument against my restraint is simple: on the numbers we actually have, investors are paying a lot for moderate top-line growth and declining recent earnings. Revenue grew just 5.3% most recently, while recent earnings were down 72.6% year over year. Net margin in 2025 was 9.2%, ROA just 3.2%, and current ratio 1.13, which is fine but not exceptional. If you strip away the romance of monopoly-like toll roads and airports, this is a company on 44x earnings, 5.2x book, and over 4x sales in a capital-intensive sector. A smart bear would say the market is capitalizing the 407 ETR-type scarcity story twice over while ignoring that mature concession assets are often bond proxies, meaning they should de-rate if rates stay higher for longer. I weigh that less heavily because the balance sheet strength and cash-generation profile provide real downside support, but the bear case absolutely has teeth if growth slows further or if asset monetizations stop flattering reported results.
What would change my mind is evidence that the business is either more compounding than I think or more ordinary than I think. On the bullish side, I would upgrade materially if Ferrovial can turn the current $11.16B revenue base into sustained high-single-digit growth while keeping operating cash flow above $2.2B and converting that into visible free cash flow without relying on one-offs; that would justify a premium multiple and support a stock above $70. On the bearish side, if 2026 earnings remain around the $1B level, operating cash flow weakens materially below $2B, or net cash starts shrinking because the company must fund growth at low returns, then the current price would look too generous and a re-rating toward the low-to-mid $50s would be reasonable.
Grok Reading
Ferrovial’s reported trajectory looks cleaner than it is. Revenue has compounded at a respectable 6.3% from $8.75B in 2022 to $11.16B in 2025, and the balance sheet is fortress-grade: $4.95B cash against only $1.24B of debt, equity of $8.89B, and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.14. Operating cash flow of $2.23B in 2025 is the real anchor of the franchise. But net income tells a different story—$218M to $395M to a $3.76B spike in 2024 then back to $1.03B in 2025—clearly dominated by concession monetizations rather than organic earnings power. On that normalized $1.03B, the stock at $63.92 and a $46B market cap trades at 44.5x earnings, 5.2x book, and 4.1x sales while delivering an 11.6% ROE and a 9.2% net margin. Those are private-equity scarcity multiples on what is still a mid-single-digit grower with a lumpy construction overlay.
The numbers therefore describe a high-quality, inflation-linked infrastructure portfolio manager—not a compounding growth engine. The 5.3% recent revenue growth and the collapse in year-over-year earnings (-72.6%) after the 2024 asset-sale sugar high confirm that the market is capitalizing mature toll-road and airport cash flows as if they were still in expansion mode. EV-to-revenue of 3.8x and a 2.6% dividend yield are tolerable only if one believes the concessions will be perpetually re-rated by privatization waves and rate-sensitive allocators. At current levels the equity is pricing roughly double the cash-flow reality the DCF stack implies near $29; even granting a quality premium for 407 ETR-type assets and the net-cash position, the gap remains wide.
The strongest counter-argument is that listed exposure to irreplaceable, inflation-protected concessions is scarce, private-market bids for comparable toll roads and airports routinely clear at elevated multiples, and $2.23B of operating cash flow on a ~$42B enterprise value is a more flattering ~19x cash-flow multiple than the 44x earnings screen suggests. A smart opponent would also note that the construction drag is already well telegraphed, regulatory capture risk is priced by sophisticated infrastructure funds every day, and the domicile shift plus potential Heathrow/407 optionality could keep thematic capital bid. I weigh those points seriously—the balance sheet and asset quality deserve a premium to a pure contractor—but they do not justify paying 120% above a fundamentals-anchored value when revenue is growing 5–6% and ROE sits in the low teens. Scarcity and narrative can support a higher floor; they do not erase the math.
I would reverse to a neutral or constructive stance if trailing net income sustainably clears $1.5B without further one-off asset sales, if operating cash flow pushes through $2.8B with visible FCF conversion, or if the shares compress into the mid-$40s where the cash-flow yield and private-market gap become compelling again. Until then the premium is too rich for the growth on offer.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Ferrovial is behaving like a mature infrastructure earner. Revenue has compounded from $8.75B (2022) to $11.16B (2025), FCF has nearly doubled from $1.16B to $2.23B, and the diluted share count has actually crept DOWN (-0.2% CAGR from 723.5M to 718.7M) - unusual discipline for a European industrial and consistent with the concession/toll-road business model where mature assets throw off cash. Liquidity is comfortable: $4.95B liquid cash, $3.71B net cash at the parent level, and self-funded operations.
Verify before trusting this (6)
- Source of the $3.76B 2024 net income spike - confirm whether it is a 407 ETR, Heathrow, or IRB Infrastructure-related revaluation/disposal
- Recourse vs non-recourse debt split at parent level to reassess the Z-score signal
- Segment-level EBITDA and margins for Managed Lanes, Toll Roads, Construction, and Airports
- Concession maturity profile and remaining life on the key US Managed Lanes (NTE, LBJ, I-66)
- Any large capex commitments (JFK Terminal One) that could pressure future FCF
- Whether the -0.2% share CAGR reflects genuine buybacks or the 2023 corporate reorganization/listing change
The composite fair value of $28.66 (signal-adjusted $28.98) implies roughly -55% downside from $63.92, and even the most generous input - the EPV floor at $36.52 - still sits ~43% below the current price. The anchored P/E of $20.80 flags that on reported earnings the stock is extremely expensive; the quality lens correctly notes GAAP understates cash generation, so the deserved value should sit above the anchored-PE mark but there is no honest bridge from mid-$30s intrinsic to a $64 print. What is priced in: that 407 ETR, Heathrow and the US managed-lanes portfolio compound at rates well above mature-toll economics, that the NYSE listing sustains a permanent multiple re-rating, and that construction stops being a drag. That is a stack of optimistic assumptions, not a margin of safety. Quality is real - FCF doubling with a shrinking share count is uncommon for European infra - so I refuse to call this a short or 'Overvalued' with high confidence. But quality raises deserved value; it does not close a 2x gap. The honest read is Rich: a good business the market already loves, trading well through any defensible intrinsic anchor.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- 407 ETR traffic and toll-escalator trajectory vs pre-COVID baseline
- Managed-lanes ramp economics (LBJ, NTE, I-77, I-66) and distributions to parent
- Heathrow stake carrying value and any monetization plans post-partial-sale
- Construction segment margin normalization and cash conversion
- Net leverage ex-project-finance and holdco recourse debt
Ferrovial sits inside one of the market's most durable narrative buckets right now: irreplaceable toll-road and airport concessions framed as inflation-protected, recession-resistant cash streams. That platform-monopoly story is running at strong intensity with moderate durability, and it is doing real work on the tape - the stock trades at a very large premium to conservative DCF, which is a signature of narrative dominance over fundamentals. As long as infrastructure-privatization and urban-mobility themes stay in vogue, the story keeps pulling the price. With beta 0.8 and a defensive sector, this name is not being whipped by the broader tape either way. A mildly risk-on regime (score +44, VIX 15.2, S&P near highs) is a modest positive for equities generically but barely grazes a low-beta concession operator - it removes de-rating pressure more than it adds fuel. Neutral macro sensitivity (rates, curve, VIX) means no dedicated cross-current from bond yields or risk pricing hitting this cohort right now. Momentum reads strong-positive with low volatility, which reinforces the perception of a compounding quality infrastructure asset and tends to attract sticky, low-turnover holders - a self-reinforcing sentiment loop. The main non-fundamental risk is narrative fragility: at a ~120% premium to fair value, any crack in the privatization or mobility thesis, or a rotation out of defensives into cyclicals, could unwind quickly.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Any sector rotation out of defensive infrastructure into cyclicals or AI-linked industrials
- Analyst target revisions or downgrades citing valuation vs mature-asset reality
- Progress or setbacks on Heathrow monetization and vertiport/urban-mobility catalysts that feed the narrative
- Bond yield spikes that would pressure long-duration concession multiples
AI reaches Ferrovial almost entirely through second-order channels, not through substitution of its product: nobody can generate a highway, an airport concession or a transmission corridor with cheaper software, so the scarce assets get relatively rarer as information work commoditizes. Inside the firm, AI compresses design, estimating, BIM clash detection, claims and predictive maintenance costs — meaningful in a construction segment running mid-single-digit margins, but competitive bidding will hand much of that back to public clients, so margin conversion is partial. The genuinely valuable AI mechanism is pricing: unregulated managed lanes monetize willingness-to-pay in real time, and better traffic/elasticity models on a fixed asset are near-pure margin. The genuine risk is demand mix, not disintermediation — if AI keeps knowledge workers off the peak-hour commute, the highest-yield toll windows thin out even as total mobility grows.
None surfaced.
Verify before trusting this (8)
- Value of held concession maturities
- Transmission project pipeline
- Permitting timelines
- US managed-lane traffic volumes
- Airport passenger throughput trends
- Grid interconnection queue growth
- Peak vs off-peak trip mix
- Toll escalator realization
The world is short durable, inflation-linked infrastructure cash flow and long fiscal constraint — which pushes governments toward private concessions, Ferrovial's exact product. US highway congestion, airport capacity shortages (Heathrow expansion debate) and grid/transmission build-out are multi-decade demand pools that do not depend on the construction cycle. The offset: higher-for-longer long rates (10y 4.68%) make new concessions harder to underwrite and make the mature portion of the portfolio behave like a bond-ish annuity rather than a growth engine. Net: the demand backdrop favours Ferrovial's asset class even as the generic E&C category slows.
When we made this prediction on Aug 18, 2026, FER was $63.92. We expect it to be $57.90 by Feb 2027, and we consider it great value under $40.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 18, 2026.
Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.