vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Ameris Bancorp (ABCB) and SENSIENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP (SXT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
SENSIENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($435.8M vs $314.4M, roughly 1.4× Ameris Bancorp). Ameris Bancorp runs the higher net margin — 35.1% vs 10.1%, a 25.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, SENSIENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.1% vs 10.0%). Over the past eight quarters, SENSIENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP's revenue compounded faster (3.9% CAGR vs 2.3%).
Ameris Bancorp is an American bank holding company headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. Through its bank subsidiary, Ameris Bank, the company operates full-service branches in Georgia, Alabama, Florida, North Carolina and South Carolina, and mortgage-only locations in Georgia, Alabama, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, and Tennessee. The company offers online and mobile banking options for both consumers and businesses.
Sensient Technologies is a global manufacturer and marketer of colors, flavors and fragrances based in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Their products are used in many foods and beverages, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, home and personal care products, specialty printing and imaging products, computer imaging and industrial colors. Sensient reported revenue of $1,468 million in 2013. Subdivisions include the Sensient Flavors & Fragrances Group and the Sensient Color Group. Within the Flavors & Fragrances G...
ABCB vs SXT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $314.4M | $435.8M |
| Net Profit | $110.5M | $44.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 15.3% |
| Net Margin | 35.1% | 10.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 10.0% | 11.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 28.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.63 | $1.04 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q1 26 | $314.4M | $435.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $307.1M | $393.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $314.2M | $412.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $300.7M | $414.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $285.9M | $392.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $290.8M | $376.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $283.8M | $392.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $300.6M | $403.5M |
| Q1 26 | $110.5M | $44.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $108.4M | $25.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $106.0M | $37.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $109.8M | $37.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $87.9M | $34.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $94.4M | $30.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $99.2M | $32.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $90.8M | $30.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 31.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 34.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 34.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 33.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 31.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 33.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 32.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | 15.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 45.9% | 9.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 43.6% | 14.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 47.4% | 13.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 39.5% | 13.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 43.3% | 11.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 44.4% | 12.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 42.1% | 12.3% |
| Q1 26 | 35.1% | 10.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | 44.2% | 6.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 33.7% | 9.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 36.5% | 9.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 30.8% | 8.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 42.5% | 8.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 35.0% | 8.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 30.2% | 7.7% |
| Q1 26 | $1.63 | $1.04 | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.59 | $0.60 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.54 | $0.87 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.60 | $0.88 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.27 | $0.81 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.35 | $0.71 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.44 | $0.77 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.32 | $0.73 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $38.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $767.8M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $4.1B | $1.2B |
| Total Assets | $28.1B | $2.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.63× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $38.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $36.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $42.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $56.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $32.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $26.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $37.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $30.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | $767.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $709.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $613.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $4.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.0B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.9B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.8B | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.8B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.7B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.6B | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | $28.1B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $27.5B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $27.1B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $26.7B | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $26.5B | $2.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $26.3B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $26.4B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $26.5B | $2.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.63× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.59× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.58× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
