vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Aflac (AFL) and Applied Materials (AMAT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Applied Materials is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($6.8B vs $4.3B, roughly 1.6× Aflac). Applied Materials runs the higher net margin — 27.9% vs 23.4%, a 4.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Aflac posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (27.9% vs -3.5%). Over the past eight quarters, Applied Materials's revenue compounded faster (0.7% CAGR vs -8.0%).
Aflac Incorporated is an American insurance company and is the largest provider of supplemental insurance in the United States. It was founded in 1955 and is based in Columbus, Georgia. In the U.S., it underwrites a wide range of insurance policies, but is perhaps more known for its payroll deduction insurance coverage, which pays cash benefits when a policyholder has a covered accident or illness. The company states it "provides financial protection to more than 50 million people worldwide".
Applied Materials, Inc. is an American corporation that supplies equipment, services and software for the manufacture of semiconductor chips for electronics, flat panel displays for computers, smartphones, televisions, and solar products. The company also supplies equipment to produce coatings for flexible electronics, packaging and other applications. The company is headquartered in Santa Clara, California, and is the second largest supplier of semiconductor equipment in the world based on r...
AFL vs AMAT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.3B | $6.8B |
| Net Profit | $1.0B | $1.9B |
| Gross Margin | — | 48.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | 25.2% |
| Net Margin | 23.4% | 27.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 27.9% | -3.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 9.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.98 | $2.36 |
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 | $4.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.9B | $6.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.7B | $7.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2B | $7.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.4B | $7.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.4B | $7.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.9B | $6.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.1B | $6.6B |
| Q1 26 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.4B | $1.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $599.0M | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $29.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $-93.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8B | $1.7B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 48.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 48.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 49.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 48.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 47.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 47.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 47.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 32.3% | 25.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 42.1% | 30.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.8% | 30.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | 30.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 39.5% | 29.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.1% | 28.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.3% | 28.8% |
| Q1 26 | 23.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 28.3% | 27.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.6% | 24.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.4% | 30.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.9% | 16.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 35.2% | 24.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -3.2% | 25.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.2% | 25.9% |
| Q1 26 | $1.98 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.58 | $2.36 | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.08 | $2.22 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.11 | $2.63 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.05 | $1.45 | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.45 | $2.09 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.17 | $2.05 | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.10 | $2.06 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $5.1B | $8.6B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $30.0B | $20.4B |
| Total Assets | $116.3B | $36.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $5.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.2B | $8.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.8B | $7.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.0B | $6.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.2B | $8.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.2B | $9.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.6B | $9.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.1B | $7.6B |
| Q1 26 | $30.0B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $29.5B | $20.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $28.7B | $19.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $27.2B | $19.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $26.3B | $18.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $26.1B | $19.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $24.8B | $18.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $26.0B | $18.2B |
| Q1 26 | $116.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $116.5B | $36.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $122.3B | $34.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $124.7B | $33.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $120.3B | $33.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $117.6B | $34.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $128.4B | $33.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $120.2B | $31.9B |
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 | — | $2.8B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $2.0B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 30.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 11.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.49× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $5.7B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $315.0M | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $399.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $589.0M | $925.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $333.0M | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $255.0M | $1.4B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $544.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 30.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 28.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 14.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 30.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 30.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 17.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 11.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 8.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 5.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 5.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 4.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 3.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.23× | 1.49× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.76× | 1.48× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.67× | 0.74× | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.31× | 0.78× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.18× | 1.49× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.15× | 0.81× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AFL
Segment breakdown not available.
AMAT
| Semiconductor Systems Segment | $4.8B | 70% |
| Applied Global Services Segment | $1.6B | 24% |
| Other | $415.0M | 6% |
