vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES INC (AIT) and Edwards Lifesciences (EW). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Edwards Lifesciences is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.6B vs $1.2B, roughly 1.4× APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES INC). Edwards Lifesciences runs the higher net margin — 23.1% vs 8.2%, a 14.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Edwards Lifesciences posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (16.7% vs 8.4%). Over the past eight quarters, Edwards Lifesciences's revenue compounded faster (9.7% CAGR vs 0.7%).
Applied Industrial Technologies, Inc. (AIT) is a public, global company based in the U.S. and focused on the distribution of bearings, power transmission products, engineered fluid power components and systems, specialty flow control products, and other industrial supplies. AIT provides engineering, design and system integration for industrial and fluid power applications, as well as customized mechanical, fabricated rubber, fluid power, and flow control shop services.
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation is an American medical technology company headquartered in Irvine, California, specializing in artificial heart valves and hemodynamic monitoring. It developed the Sapien transcatheter aortic heart valve made of cow tissue within a balloon-expandable, cobalt-chromium frame, deployed via catheter.
AIT vs EW — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.2B | $1.6B |
| Net Profit | $95.3M | $380.7M |
| Gross Margin | 30.4% | 78.0% |
| Operating Margin | 10.6% | 1.8% |
| Net Margin | 8.2% | 23.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 8.4% | 16.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 2.2% | 6.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $2.51 | $0.66 |
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 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | $1.4B |
| Q1 26 | — | $380.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | $95.3M | $91.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $100.8M | $291.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $107.8M | $333.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.8M | $358.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.3M | $385.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $103.5M | $366.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | 78.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 30.4% | 78.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 30.1% | 77.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 30.6% | 77.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 30.5% | 78.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 30.6% | 78.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 29.6% | 80.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 30.7% | 79.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q4 25 | 10.6% | 9.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.8% | 19.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.0% | 26.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 11.1% | 27.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 11.3% | 22.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.3% | 25.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.0% | 26.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 23.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | 8.2% | 5.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.4% | 18.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.8% | 21.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.6% | 25.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.7% | 27.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.4% | 226.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.9% | 26.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.66 | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.51 | $0.16 | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.63 | $0.50 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.80 | $0.56 | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.57 | $0.61 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.39 | $0.65 | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.36 | $5.13 | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.64 | $0.61 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $406.0M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.9B | — |
| Total Assets | $3.2B | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $406.0M | $4.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $418.7M | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $388.4M | $4.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $352.8M | $3.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $303.4M | $4.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $538.5M | $4.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $460.6M | $2.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $10.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9B | $10.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $10.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8B | $10.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.8B | $10.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | $9.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | $7.4B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.2B | $13.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.2B | $13.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $13.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.1B | $13.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0B | $13.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.0B | $13.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.0B | $10.1B |
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 | $99.7M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $93.4M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 8.0% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.5% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.05× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $458.5M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $99.7M | $450.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.3M | $573.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $147.0M | $290.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $122.5M | $280.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $95.1M | $-127.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $127.7M | $351.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.2M | $371.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $93.4M | $353.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $112.0M | $516.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $138.2M | $240.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $114.9M | $224.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $89.9M | $-177.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $122.2M | $299.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $111.7M | $286.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 8.0% | 22.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.3% | 33.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.3% | 15.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.8% | 15.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.4% | -12.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.1% | 22.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.6% | 20.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.5% | 6.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.6% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.7% | 3.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.6% | 4.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.5% | 3.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.5% | 3.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.6% | 6.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.05× | 4.94× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.18× | 1.97× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.36× | 0.87× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.23× | 0.78× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.02× | -0.33× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.39× | 0.11× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.15× | 1.01× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AIT
| Service Center Based Distribution Segment | $625.2M | 54% |
| Engineered Solutions Segment | $398.9M | 34% |
| Other | $75.8M | 7% |
| Hydradyne LLC | $63.1M | 5% |
EW
Segment breakdown not available.
