GC Margin Model | BuildVision Research

Per-Project Economics

Build Your Stack

Toggle ancillary services to see per-project EBITDA on a $500M project, then scroll down to see what it means across a portfolio.

Traditional GC

• Insurance Brokerage (CCIP/OCIP)
  EBITDA: $0.5M 70% margin
• Subcontractor Default Insurance
  EBITDA: $0.6M 35% margin
• Centralized Equipment Procurement
  EBITDA: $2.1M 55% margin
• Self-Perform Operations
  EBITDA: $1.2M 20% margin
• Prefabrication / Offsite Mfg
  EBITDA: $2.2M 30% margin
• Equipment Rental
  EBITDA: $0.8M 40% margin
• Accelerated Payment Program
  EBITDA: $2.3M 75% margin

Per-project EBITDA

• $6.3M
  vs. $3.1M traditional
  EBITDA multiplier 2.02x
  over CM fee alone
  Blended margin 33.7%
  vs. 25% CM fee
  % of project value 1.26%
  vs. 0.63% traditional

Cumulative EBITDA over 10 years, 3-year checkpoints ($M)

• Traditional GC
• Ancillary-stacked GC

10-year project-level gap: $307.4M
With 3 services, the stacked GC accumulates $608M vs. $300M traditional over 10 years. That's 2.0x on the same set of projects.

Enterprise Implications

Scale It Across the Firm

Same service stack applied across your annual project portfolio. Set your firm's revenue to see annual and cumulative EBITDA at the enterprise level.

• Annual firm revenue ($M)
• Avg project size ($M)
  ~ 1.8 projects/year at $500M avg

Annual enterprise EBITDA

• $11.4M
  vs. $5.6M traditional (CM fee only)

Ancillary revenue (annual)

• $11.3M
  1.3% of firm revenue. New revenue created on existing projects.

10-year cumulative gap

• $69M
  Capital the stacked GC has that the traditional GC does not. This funds acquisitions, tech, talent.

Enterprise cumulative EBITDA: Traditional vs. Stacked ($M)

Traditional GC (CM fee only)
Ancillary-stacked GC
Cumulative gap

At $900M in annual revenue with 3 ancillary services
The stacked GC generates $11.4M in EBITDA annually vs. $5.6M for the traditional GC. Over 10 years that compounds to a $69M cumulative advantage. At the $500M-$3B revenue tier, this is the difference between a GC that can self-fund growth and one that depends entirely on backlog. The firms stacking these services are not just more profitable per project. They are accumulating the capital to acquire the firms that aren't.