vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AECOM (ACM) and ARGENX SE (ARGX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
AECOM is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.8B vs $2.5B, roughly 1.5× ARGENX SE). ARGENX SE runs the higher net margin — 35.5% vs 1.9%, a 33.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, ARGENX SE posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (83.2% vs 1.6%). ARGENX SE produced more free cash flow last quarter ($322.4M vs $41.9M).
AECOM is an American multinational infrastructure consulting firm headquartered in Dallas, Texas.
AbbVie Inc. is an American pharmaceutical company headquartered in North Chicago, Illinois. They have produced drugs to treat a wide range of medical issues.
ACM vs ARGX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.8B | $2.5B |
| Net Profit | $74.5M | $877.2M |
| Gross Margin | 7.3% | 89.5% |
| Operating Margin | 5.8% | 28.9% |
| Net Margin | 1.9% | 35.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 1.6% | 83.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -48.0% | 1.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.56 | $13.25 |
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 | $3.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2B | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.8B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.0B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.1B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.2B | $901.9M |
| Q1 26 | $74.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $877.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $120.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $131.0M | $414.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $143.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $167.0M | $865.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $172.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $134.3M | $-32.5M |
| Q1 26 | 7.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 89.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.8% | 89.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.7% | 90.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.9% | 89.4% |
| Q1 26 | 5.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 28.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.0% | 19.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.9% | 8.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.5% | -15.4% |
| Q1 26 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 35.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.1% | 23.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.2% | 64.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.2% | -3.6% |
| Q1 26 | $0.56 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $13.25 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.90 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.98 | $6.32 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.08 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.25 | $13.33 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.27 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.98 | $-0.55 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.2B | $3.5B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $2.6B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.2B | $7.3B |
| Total Assets | $11.9B | $8.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.18× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6B | $1.4B |
| Q1 26 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.5B | $11.0M |
| Q1 26 | $2.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $7.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | $6.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.2B | $5.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.2B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.3B | $4.3B |
| Q1 26 | $11.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $8.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.3B | $7.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.8B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.8B | $6.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.1B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.0B | $4.8B |
| Q1 26 | 1.18× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.06× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.99× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.07× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.11× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.12× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.07× | 0.00× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $70.2M | $323.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $41.9M | $322.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 1.1% | 13.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.7% | 0.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.94× | 0.37× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $616.0M | $594.5M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $70.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $323.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $196.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $283.7M | $361.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $190.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $151.1M | $41.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $298.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $291.3M | $-124.7M |
| Q1 26 | $41.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $322.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $134.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $261.7M | $356.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $178.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $110.9M | $40.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $274.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $272.8M | $-125.5M |
| Q1 26 | 1.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 13.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.3% | 20.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.8% | 3.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.6% | -13.9% |
| Q1 26 | 0.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.5% | 0.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.0% | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.4% | 0.1% |
| Q1 26 | 0.94× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.37× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.63× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.17× | 0.87× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.33× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.90× | 0.05× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.73× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.17× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
