Skip to content

Jacobs Solutions

NYSE: J · USD

Jacobs Solutions (J) Economic Moat Analysis—

Competitive advantages, dated evidence and erosion risks.

Uncertain economic moat

Jacobs demonstrates specialized engineering capabilities and ongoing roles in complex client assets. These support plausible reputation and switching advantages, but the passages do not establish durable differentiation, costly customer switching or superior pricing outcomes. Competitive bidding and client termination rights constrain pricing discretion. Actual project delivery and growing demand support operating competence, so insufficient moat evidence should not be confused with demonstrated competitive weakness.

Intangible assets

Specialized expertise and delivery credentials are current capabilities that could support a reputation advantage. Delivery of a major biopharmaceutical campus demonstrates capability, but not competitors' inability to replicate it or a resulting price premium.

Durability
Potentially supported by accumulated project experience and customers' emphasis on past performance; the duration and competitive exclusivity of that advantage are unproven.
Competitors
Comparison not established
Erosion risks
Talent dependence, technological obsolescence and procurement emphasizing price could weaken differentiation. These disclosures describe exposure rather than demonstrated erosion.
What would invalidate the thesis
Repeated losses of technically demanding work despite comparable pricing, declining qualification success, or material failures that damage repeat awards would undermine the proposed reputation advantage.
Evidence (2) · Counterevidence (2)

Switching costs

Operating strategic water assets and deploying proprietary tools within project workflows create potential customer familiarity and integration benefits. The passages do not demonstrate replacement costs or customer dependence sufficient to establish switching costs.

Durability
Ongoing operations may sustain relationships across project stages, but disclosed client termination rights prevent assuming contractual lock-in. Full ownership of PA Consulting expands capabilities; its incremental moat benefits remain management expectations.
Competitors
Comparison not established
Erosion risks
Clients can terminate contracts, task orders can require renewed competition, and integrated tools may be replaceable without material disruption.
What would invalidate the thesis
Customers replacing Jacobs during ongoing operations without significant transition costs, or competitive rebids consistently eliminating incumbent advantages, would invalidate the switching-cost hypothesis.
Evidence (3) · Counterevidence (3)

Changes since the previous analysis

  • Retained the previous uncertain verdict: demonstrated delivery capabilities still do not establish durable competitive superiority.
  • Added assessments of disclosed incentive arrangements, independent oversight and actual transaction spending rather than treating management evidence as unavailable.
  • Recognized completed full ownership of PA Consulting in March 2026, while separating that achievement from unproven integration and competitive benefits.

Evidence limitations

  • All source dates are filing dates: the latest supplied filing is dated August 4, 2026 and reports the quarter ended June 26, 2026.
  • No direct competitor comparison is supplied. The compensation peer material does not establish product-market rivalry for individual named companies; competitor arrays therefore remain empty.
  • Project descriptions, platform integration and relationship benefits are issuer disclosures. They demonstrate activities but do not establish exclusive capabilities, customer switching costs or pricing premiums.
  • No comparable billing-rate history, realized fee changes, renewal statistics or contract-type revenue percentages are supplied. Backlog growth is indirect demand evidence and includes cancellable work.
  • The proxy supplies actual compensation arrangements and governance practices, but ownership table values, realized executive performance payouts and longer-term governance outcomes are incomplete.
  • Historical results spanning the separated businesses and the PA Consulting ownership transaction have different business scope. Transaction expenses and financing are realized outcomes; generic risk factors are not.

Financial indicators to test against the thesis

Calculated from annual filings. Missing data remains unavailable. Detailed financial charts remain in the other topics.

Financial indicators to test against the thesis
PeriodGross marginOperating marginROICFCF margin
202121.6%4.9%5.7%4.5%
202222.3%6.2%9.2%2.3%
202321.2%6.6%10.0%5.1%
202424.6%6.0%8.1%8.1%
202524.8%7.2%10.1%5.0%

Pricing power38

  • Pricing outcomes

    Disclosed pass-through business earns no or minimal markup, providing limited direct evidence of weak pricing capture in that activity. Competitive bids constrain terms elsewhere, but no company-wide fee or billing-rate trend is supplied.

  • Customer demand

    Assessed indirectly from ongoing asset operations and growing backlog in both businesses. These support continuing demand, but do not distinguish repeat customers from new wins; clients retain termination rights.

  • Margin resilience

    Reported fiscal 2025 margin expansion and subsequent gross profit improvement support operating resilience. Material realized transaction compensation expenses offset gains, and cost reimbursement offers only partial contractual protection. The evidence does not isolate pricing from mix or efficiency.

  • Pricing freedom

    Competitive government procurement, renewed task-order competition and client-specified lump sum bidding limit unilateral pricing discretion. Client termination rights further weaken contractual control.

Management63

  • Capital discipline

    Nine-month operating cash generation increased to $352.8 million, versus $61.7 million of capital expenditure. However, $614.1 million of buybacks, $123.4 million of dividends and $917.6 million of noncontrolling-interest purchases accompanied substantial net borrowing. Completed spending is observable; investment returns and repurchase value creation remain unproven.

  • Incentive alignment

    Actual arrangements include 60% performance-based long-term awards, three-year EPS and ROIC conditions, multi-year service vesting and a hedging prohibition. These demonstrate substantial alignment mechanisms. The stock-price multiplier and broad metric adjustments limit confidence in the purity of pay-for-performance; ownership compliance and realized payouts are incomplete.

  • Execution

    Delivered complex infrastructure, organic revenue growth, gross profit improvement and completed PA ownership support execution. Assessed partly from indirect operating results rather than project-level schedule or budget performance. Significant transaction expenses and unproven integration returns make the record mixed.

  • Governance

    Independent committees, an active lead independent director and an unqualified internal-control audit opinion provide demonstrated oversight evidence. Combined chair and CEO roles concentrate authority, and the audit opinion establishes reporting controls rather than exceptional governance across all decisions.

Sources and methodology

Current publication · Updated 18/10/2026 · Version 3

AI interpretation based on checked source excerpts. Issuer assertions and evidence limitations remain explicit.

Policy quality-scores-2: six equally weighted categories. The overall score requires full coverage. Missing inputs are not zero. Qualitative grades are sourced interpretations, not probabilities. 5/6 · 18/10/2026

Moat—

Insufficient evidence for every rubric criterion; no category score is inferred.

structural advantage · — · Specialized delivery and reputation are plausible advantages, but comparative barriers and economic benefits are not established.

durability · — · The passages do not establish how long differentiation can persist against bidding competition and changing technology.

customer dependency · — · Ongoing asset operations and embedded tools suggest integration, but replacement difficulty and customer dependence are unverified.

erosion resilience · — · Growing backlog demonstrates demand, but does not establish resilience of an identifiable moat through competitive erosion.

Pricing power38

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

realized pricing · 1/4 · Disclosed pass-through business earns no or minimal markup, providing limited direct evidence of weak pricing capture in that activity. Competitive bids constrain terms elsewhere, but no company-wide fee or billing-rate trend is supplied.

retention · 2/4 · Assessed indirectly from ongoing asset operations and growing backlog in both businesses. These support continuing demand, but do not distinguish repeat customers from new wins; clients retain termination rights.

margin resilience · 2/4 · Reported fiscal 2025 margin expansion and subsequent gross profit improvement support operating resilience. Material realized transaction compensation expenses offset gains, and cost reimbursement offers only partial contractual protection. The evidence does not isolate pricing from mix or efficiency.

contractual freedom · 1/4 · Competitive government procurement, renewed task-order competition and client-specified lump sum bidding limit unilateral pricing discretion. Client termination rights further weaken contractual control.

Predictability86

Five consecutive annual periods. Equal weights: nondeclining revenue frequency; revenue-growth volatility (5–40pp); positive FCF frequency; FCF-margin volatility (3–20pp). Stability indicator, not a growth forecast.

Nondeclining revenue years (%)
75.00
Revenue growth volatility (pp)
15.85
Positive FCF years (%)
100.00
FCF margin volatility (pp)
1.85

Financial strength57

Equal-weight grades: debt/FCF (1–8x), net debt/earnings before interest and tax (0–5x), interest service (1–12x), current ratio (0.75–2x). Earnings use reported operating income, or reported pretax profit plus reported interest expense when operating income is unavailable. Interest service uses earnings/interest expense; if unavailable, it uses reported operating cash flow/cash interest paid, without relabeling cash paid as accrued expense. Nonpositive cash flow/earnings score 0 for their service component; reported zero interest with a positive numerator scores 100. Net cash scores 100 for net leverage. Missing disclosures remain unavailable. General nonfinancial-company rubric, not a credit rating; exceptional and nonoperating gains are not normalized out. IFRS finance-cost and cash-flow classifications retain their reported scope.

debtFcfGrade
61.69
netDebtEbitGrade
76.82
interestCoverageGrade
44.76
currentRatioGrade
44.08
Debt / FCF (x)
3.68
Net debt / operating income (x)
1.16
Interest coverage (x)
5.92
Current ratio (x)
1.30

Capital allocation88

Three-year equal-weight indicators: pretax return on average invested capital (0–25%; equity + debt − cash, each year and its prior year), share-count growth (0–5%, lower better), share-based cost/revenue (2–20%, lower better), consolidated FCF/net income (0–1x). Return uses reported operating income or, if unavailable, EBIT calculated from reported pretax profit plus reported interest expense; exceptional/nonoperating gains are not normalized out. Share-based cost uses the reported cash-flow add-back or, if absent, separately reported recognized compensation expense; the latter never becomes an FCF adjustment. Nonpositive net income scores 0 for cash conversion; absent income/FCF stays unavailable. Nonpositive invested capital has no defined return and remains unavailable. Does not establish acquisition quality or buyback timing.

3-year pre-tax operating return (%)
13.09
3-year average dilution (%)
-7.65
3-year average SBC / revenue (%)
0.54
cashConversionGrade
100.00

Management63

Equal-weight average of four evidence-backed rubric grades (0–4), scaled to 100.

capital discipline · 2/4 · Nine-month operating cash generation increased to $352.8 million, versus $61.7 million of capital expenditure. However, $614.1 million of buybacks, $123.4 million of dividends and $917.6 million of noncontrolling-interest purchases accompanied substantial net borrowing. Completed spending is observable; investment returns and repurchase value creation remain unproven.

incentive alignment · 3/4 · Actual arrangements include 60% performance-based long-term awards, three-year EPS and ROIC conditions, multi-year service vesting and a hedging prohibition. These demonstrate substantial alignment mechanisms. The stock-price multiplier and broad metric adjustments limit confidence in the purity of pay-for-performance; ownership compliance and realized payouts are incomplete.

execution · 2/4 · Delivered complex infrastructure, organic revenue growth, gross profit improvement and completed PA ownership support execution. Assessed partly from indirect operating results rather than project-level schedule or budget performance. Significant transaction expenses and unproven integration returns make the record mixed.

governance · 3/4 · Independent committees, an active lead independent director and an unqualified internal-control audit opinion provide demonstrated oversight evidence. Combined chair and CEO roles concentrate authority, and the audit opinion establishes reporting controls rather than exceptional governance across all decisions.

Evidence

FUJIFILM Biotechnologies North Carolina, USA Jacobs delivered engineering, procurement and construction management services for one of North America’s largest end-to-end cell culture contract development and manufacturing organization (CDMO) campuses — a $3.2 billion project integrating drug substance manufacturing, automated fill–finish, and large-scale packaging.

Proxy statement / FUJIFILM Biotechnologies project delivery · Filed 18/12/2025

Damage to our reputation may affect customer and government agency decisions in awarding contracts, as many of our public-sector and large private-sector customers place high importance on past performance, safety records, and community impact.

Risk factors / reputation and contract awards · Filed 20/11/2025

•Most government contracts are awarded through a rigorous competitive process, which may emphasize price over other qualitative factors.

Risk factors / government competitive procurement · Filed 20/11/2025

If our intellectual property rights or work processes become obsolete, we may not be able to differentiate our service offerings and some of our competitors may be able to offer more attractive services to our customers.

Risk factors / intellectual property and process obsolescence · Filed 20/11/2025

Across our portfolio, we operate and maintain strategic water assets for clients — offering real-time insights that drive better capital planning and operational performance.

Proxy statement / operation and maintenance of strategic water assets · Filed 18/12/2025

We expanded deployment of Jacobs’ proprietary platforms, and our digital tools are increasingly embedded into project lifecycle management — integrating water, energy, transportation and other systems into unified, data-driven strategies.

Proxy statement / proprietary platforms and project lifecycle integration · Filed 18/12/2025

In March 2026, we acquired full ownership of PA Consulting.

MD&A / completed PA Consulting ownership acquisition · Filed 04/08/2026

The U.S. federal government has increasingly relied upon multiple-year contracts with multiple contractors that generally require those contractors to engage in an additional competitive procurement process for each task order issued under a contract.

Risk factors / additional competition for government task orders · Filed 20/11/2025

Consistent with industry practice, substantially all of our contracts are subject to cancellation or termination at the option of the client, including our U.S.

MD&A / client cancellation and termination rights · Filed 20/11/2025

government work. While management uses all information available to determine backlog, at any given time our backlog is subject to changes in the scope of services to be provided as well as increases or decreases in costs relating to the contracts included therein.

MD&A / government work and backlog scope changes · Filed 20/11/2025

Cost-reimbursable contracts generally provide for reimbursement of costs incurred plus an amount of profit.

Business / cost-reimbursable contract economics · Filed 20/11/2025

Under lump sum bid contracts, we typically bid against competitors based on client-furnished specifications.

Business / competitive lump sum bids · Filed 20/11/2025

These amounts are considered pass-through costs because the Company receives no or only a minimal mark-up associated with the billed amounts.

Compensation discussion / minimal markup on pass-through costs · Filed 18/12/2025

We closed the year with meaningful year-over-year margin expansion and a record consolidated backlog which grew 6% to $23.1 billion.

Proxy statement / fiscal 2025 margin expansion and backlog growth · Filed 18/12/2025

The increase in backlog in I&AF from June 27, 2025 was predominantly driven by growth across Advanced Manufacturing market.

MD&A / I&AF backlog growth · Filed 04/08/2026

The increase in backlog in PA Consulting from June 27, 2025 was primarily driven by organic year-over-year growth of the business.

MD&A / PA Consulting organic backlog growth · Filed 04/08/2026

These favorable operating results were offset by $366.8 million in unfavorable increases in Selling, general and administrative ("SG&A"), primarily driven by expenses associated with the PA Consulting Transaction, including $217.0 million in incremental expense mainly from the full vesting of remaining equity-based incentive grants, incremental compensation costs of $123.9 million in distributions associated with the PA Consulting employee benefit trust, and other incentives, as well as $15.7 million in restructuring and other charges incurred in connection with the PA Consulting Transaction.

MD&A / realized PA Consulting transaction compensation expenses · Filed 04/08/2026

AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS For the Nine Months Ended June 26, 2026 and June 27, 2025 (In thousands) (Unaudited) For the Nine Months Ended June 26, 2026 June 27, 2025 Cash Flows from Operating Activities: Net Earnings of the Group $ 181,064 $ 184,416 Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to net cash flows provided by operations: Depreciation and amortization: Property, equipment and improvements 67,557 62,038 Intangible assets 105,511 115,946 Loss on extinguishment of debt — 20,510 (Gain) loss on investment in equity securities (6,198) 227,305 Stock based compensation 56,882 47,421 Equity in earnings of operating ventures, net of return on capital distributions (4,960) (503) Loss (gain) on disposals of assets, net 1,010 (777) Deferred income taxes 66,970 (53,794) Changes in assets and liabilities: Receivables and contract assets, net of contract liabilities (594,961) (225,280) Prepaid expenses and other current assets 4,763 16,168 Miscellaneous other assets 68,218 49,570 Accounts payable 517,619 96,323 Accrued liabilities (139,989) (228,933) Other deferred liabilities 18,569 10,192 Other, net 10,703 (16,983) Net cash provided by operating activities 352,758 303,619 Cash Flows from Investing Activities: Additions to property and equipment (61,722) (49,655) Disposals of property and equipment and other assets 4,506 2,332 Capital contributions to equity investees, net of return of capital distributions 362 932 Net cash used for investing activities (56,854) (46,391) Cash Flows from Financing Activities: Proceeds from long-term borrowings 4,057,000 2,173,201 Repayments of long-term borrowings (2,705,828) (926,800) Repayments of short-term borrowings — (656,981) Debt issuance costs (16,475) (92) Proceeds from issuances of common stock 26,177 25,467 Common stock repurchases (614,058) (653,247) Taxes paid on vested restricted stock (29,211) (26,992) Cash dividends to shareholders (123,439) (114,813) Net dividends associated with noncontrolling interests (11,743) (7,440) Repurchase of redeemable noncontrolling interests and related costs (917,591) (8,472) Cash Impact from distribution of SpinCo Business — 70,000 Net cash used for financing activities (335,168) (126,169) Effect of Exchange Rate Changes (8,575) 17,990 Net (decrease) increase in Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash (47,839) 149,049 Cash and Cash Equivalents, including Restricted Cash, at the Beginning of the Period 1,236,816 1,146,931 Cash and Cash Equivalents, including Restricted Cash, at the End of the Period $ 1,188,977 $ 1,295,980 See the accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements – Unaudited.

Consolidated statements of cash flows / nine months ended June 26, 2026 · Filed 04/08/2026

Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units (60% of the long-term equity award value) Aligns interests of executives with long-term shareholder interests.

Executive compensation / performance-based share award proportion · Filed 18/12/2025

Retains executives and motivates them to build shareholder value over the life of the grants Awards vest and distribute after three years if performance targets are met.

Executive compensation / three-year performance vesting · Filed 18/12/2025

Metrics used for all outstanding PSUs: ◾ 3-year average Adjusted EPS (earnings per share) ◾ 3-year average ROIC (return on invested capital) Fiscal 2025 PSU awards to select top executives, including all of our NEOs, also include a one-time Stock Price Multiplier to incentivize substantial value creation and stock appreciation following the completion of the CMS Separation Transaction in fiscal 2024 Time-Based Restricted Stock Units (40% of the long-term equity award value) Retains executives and motivates them to build shareholder value over the life of the grants Awards vest ratably over four years.

Executive compensation / EPS, ROIC and stock-price multiplier · Filed 18/12/2025

The annual RSU grants awarded to our NEOs on November 13, 2024 vest 25% per year on each of the first, second, third and fourth anniversaries of the grant date, subject to the NEO’s continuous employment through each such vesting date other than in the case of death, disability or a qualified termination event, in which case, vesting will accelerate, or as otherwise provided in the Executive Severance Plan described below.

Executive compensation / actual November 2024 RSU grants · Filed 18/12/2025

☒ No Hedging — Board members and executive officers are prohibited from engaging in hedging transactions that could eliminate or limit the risks and rewards of owning our stock.

Executive compensation / prohibition on hedging · Filed 18/12/2025

McNamara, Chair). The Chairs and all members of each Committee are independent.

Corporate governance / independent committee membership · Filed 18/12/2025

(3) Mr. Pinkham serves as Lead Independent Director and presides over meetings of the independent directors and is invited to attend each Committee meeting.

Corporate governance / lead independent director responsibilities · Filed 18/12/2025

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of September 26, 2025, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework), and our report dated November 20, 2025 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

Independent auditor report / internal control opinion as of September 26, 2025 · Filed 20/11/2025

Business Experience ◾ Chair (2024 to present) and Chief Executive Officer of the Company (2023-present) ◾ Various leadership positions within the Company, including President and Chief Operating Officer (2006-2014, 2016-2023) ◾ President and Chief Executive Officer of the Brock Group (2014-2016) ◾ Chief Operating Officer of Kinetics (1999-2005) ◾ Civil Engineer Corps and Seabee Officer in U.S.

Director biography / combined chair and CEO positions · Filed 18/12/2025

Our reported net earnings for the six months ended March 27, 2026 were favorably impacted by higher gross profit of $100.5 million compared to the corresponding period last year, primarily driven by stronger performance in our Infrastructure & Advanced Facilities ("I&AF") operating segment (mainly in our International and Global Operations sectors, as discussed further below in the Segment Financial Information section).

MD&A / realized gross profit improvement · Filed 05/05/2026

We grew revenue organically mid-single digits year over year and meaningfully expanded our operating margin profile.

Compensation discussion / fiscal 2025 organic revenue growth · Filed 18/12/2025

For example, such adjustments may include, without limitation: (1) charges for restructurings; (2) gains or losses on the disposal of a segment of the business or in connection with discontinued operations; (3) charges for the impairment of goodwill or other long-lived assets; (4) gains / losses on the sale of assets; (5) major litigation settlements and/or other judgments; (6) the effects of changes in accounting principles, laws or regulations affecting reported results; and (7) costs and expenses relating to acquisitions, including integration, divestments and/or strategic investments.

Executive compensation / permitted performance metric adjustments · Filed 18/12/2025

Publication history

Publication history
VersionUpdatedCompetitive advantage
318/10/2026uncertain
218/10/2026uncertain
118/10/2026Unavailable

Sources

Research methodology and limitations · What is an economic moat?