vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES INC (AIT) and Jack Henry & Associates (JKHY). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.2B vs $619.3M, roughly 1.9× Jack Henry & Associates). Jack Henry & Associates runs the higher net margin — 20.1% vs 8.2%, a 11.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (8.4% vs 7.9%). Jack Henry & Associates produced more free cash flow last quarter ($131.4M vs $93.4M). Over the past eight quarters, Jack Henry & Associates's revenue compounded faster (7.2% 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.
Jack Henry and Associates, also known as Jack Henry is an American company founded in 1976 and devoted to financial technology and payment processing services, mostly for community banks and credit unions. They assist regional banks and credit unions to control risk, make regulatory filings and add or improve their online banking services. Jack Henry stock trades on the NASDAQ exchange under the symbol JKHY, and is also part of the S&P 400 for mid-size American companies.
AIT vs JKHY — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2026 vs Q2 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.2B | $619.3M |
| Net Profit | $95.3M | $124.7M |
| Gross Margin | 30.4% | 43.3% |
| Operating Margin | 10.6% | 25.7% |
| Net Margin | 8.2% | 20.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 8.4% | 7.9% |
| Net Profit YoY | 2.2% | 27.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $2.51 | $1.72 |
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.
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $619.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $644.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $615.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $585.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $573.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $601.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | $559.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | $538.6M |
| Q4 25 | $95.3M | $124.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $100.8M | $144.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $107.8M | $127.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.8M | $111.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.3M | $97.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $119.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $103.5M | $101.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $97.2M | $87.1M |
| Q4 25 | 30.4% | 43.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 30.1% | 45.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 30.6% | 44.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 30.5% | 41.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 30.6% | 42.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 29.6% | 42.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 30.7% | 41.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 29.5% | 39.1% |
| Q4 25 | 10.6% | 25.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.8% | 28.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.0% | 25.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 11.1% | 23.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 11.3% | 21.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.3% | 25.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.0% | 22.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.6% | 20.8% |
| Q4 25 | 8.2% | 20.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.4% | 22.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.8% | 20.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.6% | 19.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.7% | 17.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.4% | 19.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.9% | 18.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.5% | 16.2% |
| Q4 25 | $2.51 | $1.72 | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.63 | $1.97 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.80 | $1.75 | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.57 | $1.52 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.39 | $1.34 | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.36 | $1.63 | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.64 | $1.39 | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.48 | $1.19 |
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 | $28.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.9B | $2.2B |
| Total Assets | $3.2B | $3.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $406.0M | $28.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $418.7M | $36.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $388.4M | $102.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $352.8M | $39.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $303.4M | $25.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $538.5M | $43.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $460.6M | $38.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $456.5M | $27.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $60.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $250.0M |
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8B | $2.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.8B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7B | $1.8B |
| Q4 25 | $3.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.2B | $3.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $3.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.1B | $2.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.0B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.0B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.9B | $2.8B |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.00× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.03× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.14× |
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 | $152.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $93.4M | $131.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 8.0% | 21.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.5% | 3.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.05× | 1.22× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $458.5M | $654.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $99.7M | $152.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.3M | $120.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $147.0M | $327.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $122.5M | $107.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $95.1M | $89.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $127.7M | $116.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.2M | $231.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $84.2M | $97.6M |
| Q4 25 | $93.4M | $131.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $112.0M | $111.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $138.2M | $314.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $114.9M | $96.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $89.9M | $73.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $122.2M | $104.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $111.7M | $208.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $76.7M | $87.7M |
| Q4 25 | 8.0% | 21.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.3% | 17.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.3% | 51.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.8% | 16.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.4% | 12.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.1% | 17.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.6% | 37.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 6.7% | 16.3% |
| Q4 25 | 0.5% | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.6% | 1.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.7% | 2.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.6% | 2.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.5% | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.5% | 2.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.6% | 4.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.7% | 1.8% |
| Q4 25 | 1.05× | 1.22× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.18× | 0.84× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.36× | 2.56× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.23× | 0.97× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.02× | 0.92× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.39× | 0.98× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.15× | 2.29× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.87× | 1.12× |
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% |
JKHY
| Processing | $273.5M | 44% |
| Private Public Cloud | $202.7M | 33% |
| On Premise Support | $79.0M | 13% |
| Product Deliveryand Service | $64.1M | 10% |
