Competition & Peer Data API & CSV Delivery Connect to AI Assistant via MCP

Aegion's Competitiveness

A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Aegion (AEGN) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.

Peer Data As of Q1 2021
Competitors Tracked
2
Publicly traded peers
Peer Group Market Share
48.21 %
vs 54.82 % a year ago
Revenue Growth Y/Y
-36.95 %
Peers: -17.83 %
Net Margin
0.75 %
Peers: -17.62 %

Key Findings: Aegion vs Its Competitors

  • TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 702M vs 890M combined for tracked competitors (44.1% combined share).
  • Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+3.3% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs decelerating (-12.5%) for its tracked peer group.
  • Growth: Aegion generated -37.0% revenue growth year over year in Q1 2021, vs -17.8% for its tracked competitors combined.
  • Profitability: Its 0.8% net margin compares with -17.6% for the peer group.
  • Peer revenue share: Aegion accounted for 48.2% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 54.8% a year earlier.
  • Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.11M compares with $0.27M for the peer group (0.4x).

Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).

AEGN Sales vs. its Competitors, Q1 2021

Aegion reported revenue contraction of 36.95 % year on year in Q1 2021, below its competitors' combined revenue change of -17.83 %.

With a net margin of 0.75 %, Aegion achieved higher profitability than its competitors (-17.62 %).

Aegion generated 48.21 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 54.82 % a year earlier.

API endpoints for this dataset
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/AEGN/competitors
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/AEGN/relationships
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/AEGN/similar
Programmatic access for models, analytics, and integration workflows.

Aegion vs. its Competitors, Q1 2021

Revenue growth, year on year

Aegion -37.0 %
Competitors combined -17.8 %

Net margin

Aegion +0.8 %
Competitors combined -17.6 %

Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months

Aegion +3.3 %
Competitors combined -12.5 %

TTM net margin

Aegion -4.0 %
Competitors combined -3.8 %

TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.

Competitor Financial Benchmarking - TTM Commercial

TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Aegion and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.

Entity TTM Revenue Latest Q ×4 Rev Run-rate vs TTM TTM Net Income TTM Net Margin
Aegion Corp $12,345M $12,345M +12.3% · Accelerating $1,234M 12.3%
Competitors combined $12,345M $12,345M +12.3% · Accelerating $1,234M 12.3%
High-Confidence Competitors (1) $12,345M $12,345M +12.3% · Accelerating $1,234M 12.3%
Similar Growth & Profitability (7) $12,345M $12,345M +12.3% · Accelerating $1,234M 12.3%
Competitor Financial Benchmarking

TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Aegion's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.

For context: the Construction Services industry grew revenue 27.3% year over year, combined, vs -37.0% for Aegion. Aegion's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.24% to 0.12%, a loss of 0.12 percentage points.

Aegion's Competitor Quality Breadth

Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).

Entity Profitable Expanding Above Industry Growth Distressed
Aegion Corp No No No No
Competitors combined (2) 50% 100% 50% 50%
High-Confidence Competitors (1) - - - 100%
Similar Growth & Profitability (8) 62.50 % (5 of 8) 0.00 % (0 of 8) 0.00 % (0 of 8) 37.50 % (3 of 8)

Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.

Market Share of the Peer Group, Q1 2021

48.2%market share
  • Aegion48.2%
  • Competitors combined51.8%

Share of combined quarterly revenue of Aegion and its 2 tracked competitors.

See Aegion's full market share breakdown »

AEGN Stock Performance relative to its Competitors

AEGN Competitors (weighted) Percent change over the selected range

Aegion's Share Price Performance vs Peer Groups

Trailing 12-month total share price return, and the share of each group that outperformed the U.S.A. 500 over the same period. Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC.
50%beat U.S.A. 500
Competitors Combined
(1 of 2)
40%beat U.S.A. 500
Similar Growth & Profitability
(2 of 5)
Entity TTM Share Price Return
(group: median)
vs U.S.A. 500
Aegion Corp - -
Competitors combined (2) 40.4% 63.2%
High-Confidence Competitors (0) 40.4% 63.2%
Similar-Size Competitors (0) 40.4% 63.2%
Similar Growth & Profitability (5) 40.4% 63.2%
Peer Group Share Price Returns

TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Aegion's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.

Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation). Outperformance is trailing-12-month total return vs the U.S.A. 500 over the same window, not risk-adjusted.

AEGN Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors

AEGN High-Confidence Competitors (equal-weighted, 1) Percent change over the selected range

AEGN Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors

AEGN Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors (equal-weighted, 8) Percent change over the selected range

5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months

#CompetitorTTM Share Price Returnvs U.S.A. 500
1 Team Inc 282.9% Outperformed
2 North American Construction Group Ltd 282.9% Outperformed
Best-Performing Competitor Returns

TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Aegion's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.

Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.

Aegion's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers

The markets in which we operate are highly competitive, primarily on the basis of price, quality of service and capacity to perform. Most of our products face direct competition from competitors offering similar or essentially equivalent products or services. In addition, customers can select a variety of methods to meet their infrastructure installation, strengthening and rehabilitation needs, as well as their coating and cathodic protection needs, including a number of methods that we do not offer.

In the trenchless sewer rehabilitation market, the CIPP process is the preferred method. Because relatively few significant barriers to entry exist in this market, any organization with adequate financial resources and access to technical expertise may become a competitor. As such, there are numerous companies with which we compete. Worldwide, we compete with numerous smaller firms on local or regional levels and with several larger firms on the global and national levels. Despite the number of competitors, Insituform, as the worldwide pioneer of this technology, has maintained its role as a global market leader, both in the United States and abroad.

In water rehabilitation, dig and replace is still the preferred method for the majority of customers. Currently, CIPP is utilized in less than five percent of water pipeline rehabilitation jobs in the United States. Because this is a much more specialized field, with more barriers to entry, including strict government mandates, we compete primarily with a handful of global and national specialty contractors.

In our infrastructure rehabilitation business, the FRP process competes against traditional methods of structural retrofitting, but is gaining rapid acceptance in the construction and retrofitting industry. Fibrwrap Construction has been performing successful installations of FRP systems for 24 years. With its proprietary technologies relating to both products and application, Fyfe Co. is a leader in the FRP market and Fibrwrap Construction is one of the most experienced installers of the FRP system and has a well established reputation. In this field, there are significant barriers to entry, including testing requirements, experience, intellectual property and certifications. Fyfe has teamed with a number of universities around the world to conduct extensive product testing. In addition, Fyfe has dedicated significant resources to obtaining technical market acceptance of its proprietary products. As a result, Fyfe has received a number of certifications, including NSF certification for its Tyfo® Fibrwrap® system, International Code Council - Evaluation Service (ICC-ES) PMG-1040 product certification and 2006 IBC compliance for its Tyfo® pipe system for pipe strengthening and an ICC-ES Evaluation Report (ESR-2103), indicating compliance with ICC-AC125 guidelines for FRP strengthening. Because of the significant barriers to entry, Fyfe Co. and Fibrwrap Construction tend to compete with a small number of companies on a regional or national level, most of which do not provide the full spectrum of services provided by Fyfe Co. and Fibrwrap Construction.

In our corrosion protection segment, Corrpro operates in the highly-competitive field of cathodic protection for corrosion control. While this market is highly competitive, because there are relatively few barriers to entry, Corrpro is the recognized market leader in North America in this field. Competitors include a limited number of large firms, which provide services nationally, and in some instances, globally, although more prevalent are a number of small- and medium-sized firms with a more limited portfolio of products and services, which are only provided on a regional or local level. Corrpro’s competitive advantage is its broad depth of high-quality cathodic protection offerings, including its cost effective engineering, pipeline integrity construction and coating services, which are provided to customers worldwide. Through Hockway and our Corrpower joint venture, we are expanding our position as a leader in cathodic protection.

The process of utilizing HDPE liners is one of the more prevalent methods to protect pipelines servicing the energy and mining industries. United Pipeline Systems is recognized worldwide as a leader in the HDPE market, having provided HDPE solutions on six continents. And, because of barriers to entry, due to necessary technological capabilities, United Pipeline Systems tends to only compete with a small number of specialty firms globally, nationally and regionally. Through our focused efforts on expanding our services worldwide, United Pipeline Systems enjoys significant name recognition and substantial market share in this industry in the key energy and mining regions of the world.


The FBE process is one of the standard methods for pipe coating. Bayou has a presence in the North American FBE and insulation coating market. Because the pipe coating industry is very capital intensive, Bayou usually competes with a small number of global and national companies. However, Bayou also competes on a project-specific basis with small firms on local or regional jobs. These regional firms are often steel mills that have coatings plants onsite to provide for their internal coatings needs, but these firms will outsource their coatings services if projects are within their geographic reach. Competition from these regional firms on more than a project basis is unlikely as these firms tend to be restricted geographically due to their shipping limitations. CRTS has strong presence in the field of FBE coating and is an industry leader in inner diameter (ID) robotic coatings while our wholly-owned subsidiary, CCSI, is a leader in outer diameter (OD) coatings. Because of these specialized fields, CRTS and CCSI usually compete with a small number of specialty providers.


In our Energy Services segment, Brinderson operates in a fragmented and intensely competitive field of plant engineering, maintenance and construction services in the downstream petroleum refining industry, as well as performing work in the industrial and natural gas, gas processing and compression, and upstream petroleum markets. Brinderson competes with local, regional, national and international contractors and service providers. Competitors vary with the markets that are served with few competitors competing in all of the geographic markets we serve or in all of the services we provide. Contracts are generally awarded based on safety performance, reputation for quality, price, schedule, and client satisfaction.
There can be no assurance as to the success of our processes in competition with these companies and alternative technologies for pipe installation and rehabilitation, coating, cathodic protection and infrastructure installation, strengthening and rehabilitation.

Publicly Traded Peers of Aegion Corp

Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees
Company Market Cap Revenues Income Employees
Aegion Corp 920.00 701.58 -27.69 6,200
North American Construction Group Ltd 388.16 919.77 24.22 1,500
Team Inc 131.10 890.19 -33.37 5,300
SUBTOTAL 1,439.26 2,511.54 -36.84 13,000

Sources: Aegion Corp's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Aegion Corp versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.

Aegion's Competitors Named by the Company

Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.
Competitor Basis Confidence Active Sources
Victory Clean Energy Inc Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
Fyfe Co Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
United Pipeline Systems Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
Competitor Evidence Detail

Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Aegion's named competitors require a Commercial License.

Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.

Aegion's Business Segment Mix vs Peers

Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).
Company Largest Segment 2nd Segment 3rd Segment
Aegion Corp Infrastructure Solutions 69.85 % Corrosion Protection 30.15 % -
Team Inc Inspection and Heat Treating 57.41 % Mechanical Services 42.59 % -

Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).

Aegion's Productivity vs Peers Comparison

Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $
CompanyMarket CapRevenue / EmployeeIncome / Employee
Aegion Corp 920 113,158 -4,466
North American Construction Group Ltd 388 613,180 16,148
Team Inc 131 167,960 -6,296
PEERS TOTAL 519 266,170 -1,345

Aegion's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers

Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.
Company Largest Market 2nd Market 3rd Market
Aegion Corp US 69.05 % CA 13.30 % Other Foreign Countries 12.56 %
Team Inc United States 75.20 % Countries Other Than the United States and Canada 16.06 % Canada 8.74 %

Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.

Aegion's Profitability & Cost Structure

Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Construction Services industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (92 companies). See the full Construction Services industry profitability benchmarks.
Metric Company Industry Difference
Gross Margin 26.98 % 22.76 % (avg) +4.2 pp
Operating Margin 5.76 % industry median +0.4 pp
EBITDA Margin 9.19 % 4.32 % (avg) +4.9 pp
Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) 1.92 % 4.50 % (avg) -2.6 pp

Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.

Aegion's Valuation vs Competitive Position

Valuation multiples vs the Construction Services industry average (92 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns. See the full Construction Services industry valuation benchmarks.
Metric Company Industry Average Difference
P/E - 28.7x -
EV / EBITDA 14.5x 17.9x -3.4x
P/B 2.0x 4.4x -2.4x
Return on Equity -6.69 % industry aggregate -23.42 %
Return on Invested Capital 3.60 % 6.65 % (avg) -3.05 %

Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.

Aegion's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory

Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.
Metric 20132014201520162017201820192020
Revenue Growth 6.17 %21.99 %0.16 %-8.37 %11.22 %-1.87 %-8.97 %-33.46 %
Operating Margin 6.13 %-1.49 %1.50 %4.16 %-3.18 %2.22 %0.90 %5.07 %
Return on Invested Capital 3.74 %-1.09 %1.55 %3.31 %-2.91 %2.28 %0.89 %3.56 %
P/E ---27.7x-566.3x--

Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.

Aegion's Strategic Group Map

Every company in Aegion's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Aegion is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.

Revenue Growth (TTM, %)Operating Margin (%)AXRACFNAegionNWHMSICFIGITPHUHGBZH

Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.

Aegion's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)

Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.
Force Assessment Basis
Barriers to Entry Lower than typical for the industry Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 1.92 % vs industry average 4.50 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above)
Supplier Power Not covered on this page See Aegion's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data
Buyer Power Not covered on this page See Aegion's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data
Threat of Substitutes - No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated

Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.

Aegion's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength

A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.

High Strength
Medium Strength
Low Strength
High Attractiveness
Invest / Grow
Invest / Grow
Selective
Medium Attractiveness
Invest / Grow
Selective
Harvest
Low Attractiveness
Selective
Harvest
Harvest / Divest Aegion

Aegion falls in the Low attractiveness / Low strength cell: Harvest / Divest.

Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.

Aegion's SWOT

Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.

Strengths

  • Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+3.3% annualized vs trailing 12 months).

Weaknesses

  • Return on equity 23.4 points below the industry aggregate.

Opportunities

  • A meaningful share of tracked competitors (50.00 %) show financial-distress signals, a possible opening to gain share.

Threats

  • Tracked peer group's revenue run-rate is broadly decelerating (-12.5% annualized).

Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.

Aegion's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison

Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months
CompanyQuick RatioWorking CapitalDebt / EquityAsset Turnover
Aegion Corp 0.55 2.07 0.56 0.76
North American Construction Group Ltd 0.24 0.88 4.00 0.69
Team Inc 0.14 2.16 - 1.79

Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.

Aegion's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers

Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter
CompanyPeriodRevenue Y/YRevenue Q/QIncome Y/YIncome Q/Q
Aegion CorpQ1 2021-36.9 %---
North American Construction Group Ltd Q4 2025+8.0 %+8.0 %-24.8 %-24.8 %
Team Inc Q2 2026-7.5 %+8.3 %--
PEERS TOTAL-4.1 %+25.2 %-29.5 %+19.5 %

Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.

Aegion's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures

Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter
CompanyPeriodCosts Y/YCosts Q/QCapex Y/YCapex Q/Q
Aegion CorpQ1 2021-11.2 %--49.5 %+106.3 %
North American Construction Group Ltd Q4 2025+14.5 %+14.5 %-9.1 %-9.1 %
Team Inc Q2 2026-2.6 %+8.3 %+36.8 %+64.3 %

Aegion's Returns and Turnover vs Peers

ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover
CompanyROAROIROEReceivables TurnoverInventory Turnover
Aegion Corp---4.6010.86
North American Construction Group Ltd 1.83%1.29%7.27%8.4714.68
Team Inc ---4.7616.01

ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).

Aegion's Valuation vs Peers

P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book
CompanyP/EPrice / SalesPEGP/CFPrice / Book
Aegion Corp-1.31-46.572.25
North American Construction Group Ltd 10.550.42-26.041.17
Team Inc 12.630.15-24.85-
PEERS AVERAGE-0.5736.042.08

P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.

Get the full CSIMarket dataset: Subscribe API License