Engineering and Technical Services Sector Outlook — September 2026

Read the report

SlidesScroll

1 of 23

←→Full screen

INDUSTRIALS › COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES › ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES

Engineering Services: The Higher Ratings Sit with Earnings That Hold

A read across the listed engineering and technical services names and the transaction record on what the market is paying for, and what it is passing over.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

← Previous

1 / 23 · INDUSTRIALS › COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES › ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES

Next →

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

1. 01

   INDUSTRIALS › COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES › ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES

   This is the report cover, setting the sector scope and the valuation basis as of 2026-09-28.

   We're opening with the engineering and technical services sector as of September 2026, on an EV / EBITDA basis using CY2027E consensus. Across this set, the ratings split cleanly: inspection and equipment work sits apart from design-build delivery, and that split is the story we walk through.

   Everything on this page

   INDUSTRIALS › COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES › ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES Engineering Services: The Higher Ratings Sit with Earnings That Hold A read across the listed engineering and technical services names and the transaction record on what the market is paying for, and what it is passing over. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

2. 02
   CONTENTS

   What This Report Covers

   This page lists the report's five sections plus the appendix.

   We've laid the report out in five sections plus an appendix, starting with the bottom line so the conclusion lands first. From there we move through the market landscape, valuation and situations, the precedent-transaction record, and the strategic implications for how you run and grow the firm.

   Everything on this page

   CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line Engineering and Technical Services Is Not One Market, and the Price Gap Shows It 02 The Landscape Six Groups Under One Sector Label, Rated Apart 03 Valuation & Situations The Range Runs Wide on CY2027E Earnings 04 Precedent Transactions Buyers Have Stayed Active Across the Capability Spectrum 05 Strategic Implications What This Means for the Firm You Run 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

3. 03
   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

   Engineering and Technical Services Prices Inspection and Equipment Work Apart from Design-Build Delivery

   This page states the report's central finding: inspection and equipment work is priced apart from design-build delivery.

   Across the 15 of 22 companies with a usable CY2027E EBITDA estimate, the faster-growing half holds 14.6x against 9.0x for the slower half, and a forward multiple already credits the growth in the forecast, so that premium is associated with earnings that hold. Mandated inspection and testing work prices at 15.0x against 6.8x for the adjacent project-delivery group, and the top four names in the range sit at 16.1x against 6.0x for the bottom four. Precedent transactions land near the middle of that public range — NV5 Global, Inc. at 10.7x and BCC Engineering, LLC at 13.0x — which is where buyers appear to test funded backlog and contract mix rather than growth alone. So the sector is not one valuation story; it is at least two, and knowing which one your business belongs to is the first strategic decision on the table.

   Everything on this page

   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Engineering and Technical Services Prices Inspection and Equipment Work Apart from Design-Build Delivery The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (15 of 22 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 The Faster-Growing Half Holds the Higher Rating Split at 6% revenue growth, the faster half of the 15 names with a forward estimate sits at 14.6x on CY2027E EBITDA, alongside 9.0x for the slower half, on 8 and 7 names respectively. A forward multiple already credits the growth in the forecast, so a premium that survives it is associated with earnings that hold. 2 Mandated Inspection Work Is Rated Above Project Delivery Asset integrity, inspection and non-destructive testing prices at 15.0x on CY2027E EBITDA on the 2 names in it with a forward estimate, against 6.8x for the adjacent models group on its 2 rated names. Demand set by regulation, permitting and inspection cycles is associated with a different durability class from project capex in how these names are rated. 3 Two Ratings Sit Inside One Sector The four names at the top of the range price at 16.1x on CY2027E EBITDA and the four at the bottom at 6.0x, with the middle of the range at 9.5x. That is 15 of the 22 companies on the page; the remaining 7 carry no forward estimate. 4 The Price Discussion Turns on Funded Backlog and Contract Mix Precedent transactions land around the middle of the public range: NV5 Global, Inc. went at 10.7x EBITDA and BCC Engineering, LLC at 13.0x. In this sector the rating is defended on funded versus unfunded backlog, cost-plus and time-and-materials weighting, recompete exposure and whether client relationships sit with the firm or with individuals. 9.5x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 15 rated of 22 companies 16.1x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 6.0x at the discount end top quartile (n=4) against bottom quartile (n=4) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 28 Transactions with disclosed terms 96 recorded in this tier · 3 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

4. 04
   SECTION 02

   02

   This is a section divider introducing the market-landscape section.

   We move now to the market map: six groups sit under one sector label, and the market rates them apart. This section shows what each group sells and where its valuation currently sits.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Six Groups Under One Sector Label, Rated Apart What each group sells and where the market puts it. 02 of 06 Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

5. 05
   02 · MARKET MAP

   Inspection and Equipment Work Holds the Upper End of This Sector Map

   This page groups the 22 approved companies by business segment and shows the median EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) per group.

   We've grouped the 22 approved companies by business segment, and inspection and equipment work holds the upper end of this map on median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E). That separation is the clearest signal in the whole comparable set: the market is not rating this sector as one business, it's rating several. For an owner or acquirer, the group your business sits in matters more than the sector label on the door.

   Everything on this page

   02 · MARKET MAP Inspection and Equipment Work Holds the Upper End of This Sector Map 22 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 DESIGN-BUILD ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 8 cos median 9.5x J ACM TTEK STN LGN KBR EXPO BWMN The largest group by name count and the one whose rating moves with backlog quality and fixed-price exposure. ADJACENT: PROCESS AND FLUID-HANDLING EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURING 4 cos median 15.2x IEX ATS GRC TAYD Product economics with installed-base service behind them, rated at the upper end of the map. ADJACENT: PRECISION TOOLING MANUFACTURING 2 cos median 10.3x LECO KMT Cyclical industrial demand, where the rating has tracked the point in the cycle more than the margin. SECURITY ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL PROTECTION SERVICES 2 cos 8.5x · 1 rated MG SUGP Technical protection scopes with accreditation and clearance requirements that limit who can bid. ASSET INTEGRITY, INSPECTION AND NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING 2 cos median 15.0x ULS TRNS Mandated inspection and calibration cycles give this work a repeating demand rhythm. ADJACENT MODELS 4 cos median 6.8x BAH AMTM RES SLDP Government services, mission support and wellsite technical work, priced on contract visibility.

6. 06
   02 · LANDSCAPE

   Six Groups Under One Label, and the Market Rates Them Apart

   This page describes what each of the six segments does and why the market rates it the way it does.

   The same six groups reappear here with the detail added: what each one does, and why that shapes its median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) rating. Full company-level detail behind these medians sits in the appendix for any name you want to trace. The takeaway carries forward: segment, not sector, is the more useful frame for thinking about where your business is rated.

   Everything on this page

   02 · LANDSCAPE Six Groups Under One Label, and the Market Rates Them Apart Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/EBITDA Names to know What they do — and why it matters Design-build engineering and construction management 8 36% 9.5x Jacobs Solutions Inc. (J) · Aecom (ACM) · +6 more The core delivery engine. Eight of the 22 companies, or 36% of the set, sit here at 9.5x on CY2027E EBITDA across the 5 in it with a forward estimate. It spans owner's engineer and program roles through to self-perform delivery, and the ratings inside it are spread wider than the group figure suggests. Adjacent: process and fluid-handling equipment manufacturing 4 18% 15.2x IDEX Corporation (IEX) · ATS Corporation (ATS) · +2 more Product economics, service annuity behind. Four names, rated at 15.2x on CY2027E EBITDA across the 3 with a forward estimate. Installed-base service, spares and specification-led selling give this group a revenue pattern that does not depend on winning the next project. Adjacent: precision tooling manufacturing 2 9% 10.3x Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. (LECO) · Kennametal Inc. (KMT) Cyclical industrial demand, two names. Both names carry a forward estimate and the group sits at 10.3x on CY2027E EBITDA. The two sit at opposite ends of the rated range, which says the market is reading their cycle position and end markets separately. Security engineering and technical protection services 2 9% 8.5x n=1 Mistras Group, Inc. (MG) · SU Group Holdings Limited Ordinary Shares (SUGP) Accreditation gates the bidder list. Two names, with one carrying a forward estimate, at 8.5x on CY2027E EBITDA. Technical protection and inspection scopes where facility accreditation and cleared staff limit who can compete, and where labour cost pass-through shapes reported margin. Asset integrity, inspection and non-destructive testing 2 9% 15.0x UL Solutions Inc. (ULS) · Transcat, Inc. (TRNS) Inspection cycles repeat by mandate. Two names, both with a forward estimate, at 15.0x on CY2027E EBITDA. Statutory inspection, calibration and metrology work recurs on a schedule set outside the customer's capex committee, and that visibility is reflected in where the group sits. Adjacent models 4 18% 6.8x Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (BAH) · Amentum Holdings, Inc. (AMTM) · +2 more Contract visibility sets the tone. Four names — government services, mission support and wellsite technical work — at 6.8x on CY2027E EBITDA across the 2 with a forward estimate. Recompete cycles, funded backlog and appropriations timing dominate how this group is read.

7. 07
   SECTION 03

   03

   This is a section divider introducing the valuation and situations section.

   Section three covers where the range runs wide on CY2027E earnings — who holds the top, and who holds the bottom. We use it to set up the drivers behind that spread.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS The Range Runs Wide on CY2027E Earnings Who holds the top of the range, who holds the bottom. 03 of 06 Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

8. 08
   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

   At the Top of the Range, the Ratings Sit with Work That Recurs

   This page ranks all 15 rated companies by EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) against a sector median of 9.5x.

   All 15 rated companies sort here by EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), against a sector median of 9.5x. At the top of the range, the ratings sit with work that recurs — the pattern holds across tier zones cut at the rated set's own quartiles. That concentration tells us the premium is not scattered at random; it clusters with a specific kind of revenue, and that's the driver worth testing next.

   Everything on this page

   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION At the Top of the Range, the Ratings Sit with Work That Recurs EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 15 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 9.5x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (15 of 22 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 16.1x CORE · median 9.5x DISCOUNT · median 6.0x Sector median 9.5x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top end sells expertise. IDEX Corporation (IEX), Transcat, Inc. (TRNS), Exponent, Inc. (EXPO) and Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. (LECO) sit at 16.1x on CY2027E EBITDA. Three of the four sell product, calibration or reputation-priced advice rather than scope-priced delivery capacity, and Exponent, Inc. (EXPO) reports a 30% EBITDA margin. The bottom end carries delivery risk. Mistras Group, Inc. (MG), KBR, Inc. (KBR), Kennametal Inc. (KMT) and RPC, Inc. (RES) sit at 6.0x on CY2027E EBITDA. Their common thread is exposure to project timing, cycle and recompete rather than a shortage of growth, and the spread between the two ends holds across 15 of the 22 companies on this page. A forward lens already credits growth. This is CY2027E EBITDA, so the forecast is inside the number before the comparison starts. A premium that survives that lens is associated with earnings buyers expect to hold through a recompete cycle, not with a growth rate still to be delivered.

9. 09
   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

   The Faster Half of the Set Carries the Higher Rating, and Margin Does Not Sort It Alone

   This page splits the rated set by revenue growth and by EBITDA margin to see which driver correlates with the rating.

   Split at the covered median, the faster-growing half of the rated set carries the higher EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) rating; margin alone does not sort the group the same way. These are cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates, and the reading is association, not causation — growth and rating move together here, but that doesn't prove one causes the other. Either way, it points toward growth as the more consistent marker of where the premium sits.

   Everything on this page

   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS The Faster Half of the Set Carries the Higher Rating, and Margin Does Not Sort It Alone Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=8; slower n=7; higher-margin n=8; lower-margin n=7). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 6% · EBITDA-margin split at 18% Growth Above the Cut-off Travels with a Higher Forward Multiple Split at 6% revenue growth, the 8 faster-growing names among the 15 with a forward estimate sit at 14.6x on CY2027E EBITDA and the 7 slower names at 9.0x. The relationship is an association, not a mechanism: Kennametal Inc. (KMT) grows at 17% and still prices at 5.2x. Wide Margins Alone Have Not Lined up with the Higher Ratings ATS Corporation (ATS) reports a 28% EBITDA margin and sits in the middle tier, while Transcat, Inc. (TRNS) reports 2% and sits at the top of the range at 16.3x. What the wide-margin names at the top have in common is work that repeats by mandate or reputation, not profitability on its own. Funded Backlog and Contract Mix Sit Behind the Durable Ratings Cost-plus and time-and-materials weighting, incumbency on renewable frameworks and IDIQ vehicles, and demand set by permitting and inspection cycles are the items buyers test first. This data cannot attribute the price spread to them, but in our experience they decide whether a rating holds through a recompete. Serial Acquirers Are Read on Utilization, Not on Acquired Scale Aecom (ACM) shows 29% revenue growth and Tetra Tech, Inc. (TTEK) sits among the larger design-build names on this page. For any roll-up, the question buyers put is whether acquired staff reach the platform's chargeability and realization, or whether the deals show up mainly as amortization.

10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    The Higher Ratings Cluster in Inspection, Equipment and the Faster Design-Build Names

    This page cuts the rated set on EV/EBITDA versus the sector median and revenue growth versus the covered median to map situations.

    Cutting the set on EV / EBITDA against the 9.5x sector median and on revenue growth against the 6% covered median, the higher ratings cluster in inspection, equipment and the faster design-build names. These are observations on where companies sit today, not recommendations to buy or sell any security. The map is a starting point for asking which quadrant your own business would land in.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP The Higher Ratings Cluster in Inspection, Equipment and the Faster Design-Build Names Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (9.5x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (6%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Rated up and Growing Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 6 names IDEX Corporation (IEX) · Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. (LECO) · UL Solutions Inc. (ULS) · +3 more Six names sit above the sector middle on both the rating and revenue growth, including IDEX Corporation (IEX), UL Solutions Inc. (ULS), Exponent, Inc. (EXPO), Transcat, Inc. (TRNS), Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. (LECO) and Legence Corp. Class A Common stock (LGN). For an owner, this is the group whose work repeats and whose earnings buyers expect to hold through a cycle. Rated up on Slower Growth Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 2 names Stantec Inc. (STN) · The Gorman-Rupp Company (GRC) Stantec Inc. (STN) and The Gorman-Rupp Company (GRC) hold an above-middle rating on slower growth. That combination usually rests on visibility — funded backlog, installed base, incumbency — rather than on the pace of the top line, and it is defended by protecting mix rather than chasing volume. Growing, Rated Below the Middle Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 2 names Kennametal Inc. (KMT) · Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) Kennametal Inc. (KMT) and Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (BWMN) are growing faster than the sector middle while rated below it. Growth on its own has not closed the gap here, which points the attention to margin quality, fixed-price exposure and how much of the top line is pass-through. Below the Middle on Both Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 5 names Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (BAH) · KBR, Inc. (KBR) · ATS Corporation (ATS) · +2 more Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (BAH), KBR, Inc. (KBR), ATS Corporation (ATS), RPC, Inc. (RES) and Mistras Group, Inc. (MG) sit below the middle on both measures. Recompete timing, appropriations cycles and end-market cycle position dominate this group, so the operating agenda is contract mix and on-contract growth.

11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    Clearing Both Bars Is Where the Rating Sits, and Clearing One Has Been Worth Less

    This page plots revenue growth against EBITDA margin and shows the median EV/EBITDA for each quadrant.

    Plotting CY2027E revenue growth against CY2026E EBITDA margin, the companies that clear both the 6% growth and 18% margin bars hold the highest quadrant median; clearing only one bar has been worth less. The quadrant medians run on a small set of names, so we'd treat the pattern as directional rather than precise. Still, it reinforces the same read: durability shows up when growth and margin show up together.

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY Clearing Both Bars Is Where the Rating Sits, and Clearing One Has Been Worth Less Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2026E, y-axis) · 15 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (6% growth, 18% margin) · median EV/EBITDA per quadrant · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/EBITDA (balanced n=5; margin-only n=3; growth-only n=3; neither n=4). Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 5% 10% 15% 10% 20% 30% MARGIN ONLY median 9.5x BALANCED median 15.4x NEITHER median 7.7x GROWTH ONLY median 10.8x RES MG ATS BAH GRC KBR STN TRNS IEX LECO ULS EXPO BWMN LGN KMT x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2026E) HOW TO READ THIS Read left to right for revenue growth and bottom to top for EBITDA margin, split at 18%. The five names clearing both bars — IDEX Corporation (IEX), Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. (LECO), UL Solutions Inc. (ULS), Exponent, Inc. (EXPO) and Kennametal Inc. (KMT) — sit at 15.4x on CY2027E EBITDA, against 7.7x for the four names clearing neither, on the 15 names with a forward estimate. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 1 of 15 names clear it (KMT).

12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    Decide Which Kind of Work Your Next Dollar of Capacity Goes Into

    This page frames the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve about where to put the next dollar of capacity.

    This is a NeuraCap view, framed as questions rather than answers: which kind of work should the next dollar of capacity go into, given what the rated set shows about where the premium sits. These are observations grounded in the cohort data shown on the prior pages, not recommendations. The point is to make the decision explicit rather than let it default to whatever backlog is easiest to add.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA Decide Which Kind of Work Your Next Dollar of Capacity Goes Into NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Put New Capacity Where the Demand Repeats by Mandate Work tied to permitting, statutory inspection and calibration cycles carries a demand rhythm that project capex does not, and the inspection and testing names here sit at the upper end of the range. The practical question for a design-build firm is which recurring adjacent scopes it can self-perform under licences and accreditations it already holds. What changes the answer: A change in appropriations or permitting timetables that alters the rhythm of mandated work. Shift the Weight of the Book Away from Lump-Sum Exposure Cost-plus and time-and-materials weighting is among the first things a buyer tests, alongside funded versus unfunded backlog and recompete timing. Firm-fixed-price work can carry attractive margin and still weigh on how durable the earnings look if legacy claims and unbilled receivables sit behind it. What changes the answer: A single contract approaching recompete rising above the share of net service revenue the board is comfortable with. Test Whether Tuck-Ins Add Utilization or Only Add Scale Sponsor platforms in site development, testing, calibration and commissioning buy founder-owned firms at acquisition economics below their own rating. The measure of whether that worked is chargeability, realization and on-contract growth in the acquired offices, not the count of deals closed. What changes the answer: Two consecutive quarters of acquired offices running below the platform's utilization. Move Client Relationships from Individuals onto the Firm Key-person dependency on a small group of rainmakers is one of the items diligence prices explicitly, alongside professional liability history. Converting named-principal relationships into framework positions, IDIQ vehicles and task-order incumbency is slow work that shows up in how durable the earnings look. What changes the answer: Retirement or departure of a principal carrying a material share of client billings.

13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    This is a section divider introducing the precedent-transactions section.

    Section four turns to the deal record: buyers have stayed active across the capability spectrum. We look at what the transaction record shows about what actually gets paid for.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Buyers Have Stayed Active Across the Capability Spectrum What the transaction record shows about what gets paid for. 04 of 06 Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13

14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    What Buyers Agreed to Pay for Whole Companies in Engineering and Technical Services

    This page presents case studies on transactions with disclosed terms, priced on LTM financials at announcement.

    We've picked case studies from the transactions that carry disclosed terms, priced on LTM financials at the time each deal was announced; the complete list sits in the appendix. NV5 Global, Inc. and BCC Engineering, LLC are among the names here, each with a read on why the deal is thought to have happened. Multiples on this LTM basis aren't directly comparable to the CY2027E public multiples shown earlier, so we don't draw a spread between the two. What the case studies do show is which contract characteristics buyers were willing to pay up for.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES What Buyers Agreed to Pay for Whole Companies in Engineering and Technical Services 3 of 28 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 92 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 68 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 May-2025 $1.7B Acuren Corporation Acuren Corporation puts licensed engineering consulting alongside its inspection platform with NV5 Global… EV / LTM revenue 1.7x EV / LTM EBITDA 10.7x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Acuren Corporation runs asset integrity and testing work; NV5 Global, Inc. brings licensed infrastructure, geospatial and building consulting scopes. The combination suggests a buyer adding disciplines and client credentials it can staff and supervise because it already runs a technical delivery model. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The transaction was recorded at $1.7B, at 1.7x revenue and 10.7x EBITDA. That earnings multiple sits between the two ends of the listed range on CY2027E EBITDA and close to the middle of it. Feb-2026 $1.2B Base Electron, Inc. Base Electron, Inc. agrees to take on Babcock & Wilcox Enterprises, Inc. at a full earnings multiple. EV / LTM revenue 2.0x EV / LTM EBITDA 24.2x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Babcock & Wilcox Enterprises, Inc. supplies energy and environmental systems with an installed base behind them, and the deal suggests appetite for service and technology content rather than for project backlog alone. Announced in Feb-2026 and still at announced status. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Recorded at $1.2B, 2.0x revenue and 24.2x EBITDA. An earnings multiple that far above the top of the listed range on CY2027E EBITDA typically reflects, in our reading, a trough earnings base or value the buyer expects to sit outside current EBITDA. Sep-2017 $0M Novume Solutions, Inc. acquires Global Technical Services, Inc. and Global Contract Professionals, Inc. EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Acquirers in this sector are led by multidisciplinary design and programme-management firms and government services primes, buying discipline depth, geographic coverage, client credentials or contract vehicle access. The fit turns on whether the buyer can underwrite the target's people because it runs the same delivery model. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Pricing here is customarily set on adjusted EBITDA, with owner compensation, non-recurring project charges and prior tuck-ins normalised before the multiple is applied. That adjusted basis is what a transaction in this sector is benchmarked against when it is read beside the listed set.

15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

    This is a section divider introducing the strategic-implications section.

    Section five asks what this means for the firm you run — the operating moves the evidence points toward. We close this section with the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What This Means for the Firm You Run Operating moves the evidence on these pages points toward. 05 of 06 Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15

16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    What the Spread Means for How You Run and Grow the Firm

    This page sets out the operating questions the valuation spread raises for owners, boards and acquirers.

    The spread we've walked through raises specific operating questions: for owners, whether new capacity is weighted toward funded and recurring scopes; for boards, whether recompete and key-person exposure are being priced before a deal forces the issue; for acquirers, whether tuck-ins are earning their price through utilization gains. These are NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report, framed as observations rather than recommendations. Taken together, they turn a market-level pattern into a short list of things worth checking inside your own business.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What the Spread Means for How You Run and Grow the Firm NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Mix and Backlog Quality Are Where the Rating Is Won The upper end of this set is held by work with a repeating demand rhythm and by wide-margin technical practices. The operating move is weighting new capacity toward funded, reimbursable and recurring scopes rather than toward volume that dilutes reported margin through pass-throughs. FOR BOARDS Recompete and Key-Person Exposure Are Priced Explicitly Funded versus unfunded backlog, contract mix and whether client relationships sit with the firm or with individuals are the items buyers price. Those are operating questions for the board long before they are transaction questions, and they move the durability a forward multiple is meant to capture. FOR ACQUIRERS Tuck-Ins Earn Their Price When Utilization Follows The transaction record here shows strategic consolidators and sponsor platforms buying discipline depth, licensure and contract vehicle access. The test after closing is chargeability, realization and on-contract growth in the acquired offices; without those, acquired scale reads as amortization rather than margin.

17. 17
    SECTION 06

    06

    This is a section divider introducing the appendix of comparables, precedent transactions and methodology.

    The final section carries the full universe behind every figure in the body: the comparables detail, the valuation basis and where each underlying disclosure sits. We use it as the reference set for anything a client wants to trace.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17

18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    This page lists public comparables on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier, for the first half of the universe.

    This page carries the comparable set on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier, with shading marking names above and below the 9.5x sector median. Fifteen companies carry a rating here; seven do not, for lack of an eligible multiple. The companion workbook carries the complete field set behind every row.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (9.5x); amber marks below · 15 rated companies; 7 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 15 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥15.3x · median 16.1x · 4 companies IDEX Corporation IEX Adjacent: process and fluid-handling equipment… $18.4B 17.1x 6% 27% 34 Transcat, Inc. TRNS Asset integrity, inspection and non-destructive testing $927M 16.3x 6% 2% 21 Exponent, Inc. EXPO Design-build engineering and construction management $3.1B 15.9x 8% 30% 38 Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. LECO Adjacent: precision tooling manufacturing $15.9B 15.4x 6% 20% 27 CORE — 8.6x–15.3x · median 9.5x · 7 companies The Gorman-Rupp Company GRC Adjacent: process and fluid-handling equipment… $2.3B 15.2x 6% 19% 25 UL Solutions Inc. ULS Asset integrity, inspection and non-destructive testing $13.4B 13.7x 7% 27% 36 Legence Corp. Class A Common stock LGN Design-build engineering and construction management $7.1B 10.8x 14% 12% 26 Stantec Inc. STN Design-build engineering and construction management $9.4B 9.5x 6% 18% 24 Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation BAH Program and project management consultancy $11.8B 9.1x 5% 11% 16 ATS Corporation ATS Adjacent: process and fluid-handling equipment… $2.7B 9.0x 5% 28% 19 Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. BWMN Design-build engineering and construction management $970M 8.7x 12% 18% 31 DISCOUNT — <8.6x · median 6.0x · 4 companies Mistras Group, Inc. MG Security engineering and technical protection services $879M 8.5x 5% 13% 18 KBR, Inc. KBR Design-build engineering and construction management $6.9B 6.9x 6% 12% 17 Kennametal Inc. KMT Adjacent: precision tooling manufacturing $3.0B 5.2x 17% 26% 35

19. 19
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    This page continues the public comparables list on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier.

    The comparable set continues here, on the same basis: EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), tiered against the 9.5x sector median. Together the two pages cover all 15 rated companies plus the 7 without an eligible multiple. Any name on this page links back to its underlying source for a client who wants to check the number directly.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (9.5x); amber marks below · 15 rated companies; 7 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 15 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 DISCOUNT — CONTINUED — <8.6x · median 6.0x · 4 companies RPC, Inc. RES Wellsite and energy field technical services $1.1B 4.6x 2% 13% 16

20. 20
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This page lists precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first, out of the transactions recorded in this tier.

    This page lists the transactions with disclosed terms, newest first; multiples are shown on LTM financials at the time of announcement. Some records here carry data-quality flags — deal-value units, divestiture roles or duplicate identifiers — and are shown as recorded rather than corrected. Transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are held in the companion workbook rather than shown here, and this LTM basis is not directly comparable to the CY2027E public multiples used elsewhere in this report.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 28 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (96 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 92 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 68 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 28 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Feb-2026 Base Electron, Inc. → Babcock & Wilcox Enterprises, Inc. $1.2B 2.0x 24.2x Base Electron, Inc. agreed to acquire Babcock & Wilcox Enterprises, Inc. in Feb-2026 at $1.2B as recorded in the filing. The target combines energy and environmental equipment with an installed base to service, which is a different economic profile from project… May-2025 Acuren Corporation → NV5 Global, Inc. $1.7B 1.7x 10.7x Acuren Corporation completed its acquisition of NV5 Global, Inc. in May-2025 at $1.7B as recorded in the filing. It pairs an asset integrity and testing platform with licensed engineering and infrastructure consulting scopes. Nov-2024 Parsons Corporation → BCC Engineering, LLC n/a n/a 13.0x Parsons Corporation announced the acquisition of BCC Engineering, LLC in Nov-2024 at 13.0x EBITDA. Transport and infrastructure design capacity with local credentials is the kind of capability a programme-management prime can staff and cross-sell immediately. Aug-2024 WSP Global Inc. → Power Engineers, Incorporated n/a n/a 15.2x WSP Global Inc. announced the acquisition of Power Engineers, Incorporated in Aug-2024 at 15.2x EBITDA. Grid, transmission and energy delivery disciplines sit close to regulated and appropriated funding streams, and the price paid reflects that positioning. Jan-2024 Crane Company → Vian Enterprises, Inc. n/a n/a 12.9x Crane Company announced the acquisition of Vian Enterprises, Inc. in Jan-2024 at 12.9x EBITDA. Engineered components with qualification barriers and aftermarket content fit a diversified industrial's model of buying specification-led niches. Jan-2023 Tetra Tech, Inc. → RPS Group plc n/a n/a 10.4x Tetra Tech, Inc. announced the acquisition of RPS Group plc in Jan-2023 at 10.4x EBITDA. Buying an established consultancy with home-market licensure and client credentials is the standard route into a regulated geography. Jan-2023 GI Partners → Atlas Technical Consultants n/a n/a 13.9x GI Partners announced the acquisition of Atlas Technical Consultants in Jan-2023 at 13.9x EBITDA. Testing, inspection and infrastructure consulting is a fragmented niche where sponsors run buy-and-build programmes on founder-owned tuck-ins. Jul-2021 Huntington Ingalls → Alion Holding Corp. n/a 1.9x 25.0x Huntington Ingalls announced the acquisition of Alion Holding Corp. in Jul-2021 at 1.9x revenue. Cleared workforce, accredited facilities and position on government contract vehicles are what a defence prime underwrites in a deal of this type. Jul-2021 Adecco Group AG → AKKA Technologies SE n/a n/a 10.6x Adecco Group AG announced the acquisition of AKKA Technologies SE in Jul-2021 at 10.6x EBITDA. Outsourced engineering capacity sold by the billable hour trades closer to staffing economics than to specification-led consulting.

21. 21
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This page continues the list of precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first.

    The transaction list continues here on the same basis, with deal values linking back to the underlying filing. As before, multiples on this page are LTM at announcement and are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis shown in the valuation pages. The companion workbook carries the remaining transactions beyond what's shown across these two pages.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 28 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (96 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 92 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 68 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 28 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 21 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Dec-2019 Leidos, Inc. → Dynetics, Inc. n/a n/a 12.6x Dec-2019 Leidos Holdings, Inc. → DYHC, Inc. (a/k/a Dynetics) n/a n/a 12.6x Oct-2019 Affiliates of American Securities LLC & Lindsay Goldberg LLC → Management Services business (unit of Management Services business) n/a n/a 11.6x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, divestiture roles reassigned. Jun-2019 Capgemini SE → Altran Technologies SAS n/a n/a 11.2x Jun-2019 CGI Group Holdings Europe Limited → SCISYS Group PLC n/a n/a 20.8x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. May-2019 Serco Inc. → Naval Systems Business Unit of Alion Science and Technology Corporation n/a n/a 10.4x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Mar-2019 ManTech International Corporation → Kforce Government Holdings, Inc. n/a n/a 10.1x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Oct-2018 Science Applications International Corp. → Engility Holdings, Inc. n/a n/a 14.0x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Sep-2017 Novume Solutions, Inc. → Global Technical Services, Inc. and Global Contract Professionals, Inc. $0M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved.

22. 22
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    This page explains the sources, assumptions and data-quality treatment behind the report.

    This page explains how the report was built — the valuation basis, what was excluded, and where each underlying disclosure sits. Every figure in the body ties back to a specific source, and this page is where to look when a number needs tracing. Use it as the methodology reference for any figure raised elsewhere in the deck.

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 22 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (15 of 22 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Engineering and Technical Services and it clears the coverage gate with 15 of 22 companies (68%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 15 of the 15 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 12 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 986 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (985) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

23. 23

    Across This Set, the Higher Ratings Sat with Mandated, Funded, Repeating Work.

    This is the closing page, restating that higher ratings sat with mandated, funded, repeating work.

    Across this set, the higher ratings sat with mandated, funded, repeating work — that's the pattern this report traces from the market map through the transaction record. The companion tables alongside this deck carry the full universe, the exclusion ledger and the complete source index for any figure worth tracing further.

    Everything on this page

    Across This Set, the Higher Ratings Sat with Mandated, Funded, Repeating Work. NeuraCap AI — Engineering and Technical Services Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Engineering and Technical Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 23

More coverage in Industrials

• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Engineering and Technical Services Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Pumps, Compressors and Fluid Handling Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Pumps, Compressors and Fluid Handling Sector Outlook — September 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Railroads Sector Outlook — September 2026