vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. (ALNY) and Rackspace Technology, Inc. (RXT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.2B vs $682.8M, roughly 1.7× Rackspace Technology, Inc.). ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. runs the higher net margin — 17.6% vs -4.8%, a 22.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (96.4% vs -0.4%). Over the past eight quarters, ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.'s revenue compounded faster (33.0% CAGR vs -0.6%).
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is an American biopharmaceutical company focused on the discovery, development and commercialization of RNA interference (RNAi) therapeutics for genetically defined diseases. The company was founded in 2002 and is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts. In 2016, Forbes included the company on its "100 Most Innovative Growth Companies" list.
Rackspace Technology, Inc. is an American cloud computing company based in San Antonio, Texas. It also has offices in Reston, Virginia, as well as in Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, India, Dubai, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Singapore, Mexico, Toronto and Hong Kong. Its data centers are located in Amsterdam (Netherlands), Virginia (USA), Chicago (USA), Dallas (USA), London (UK), Frankfurt (Germany), Hong Kong (China), Kansas City (USA), New York City (USA), San Jose (USA), Shangh...
ALNY vs RXT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.2B | $682.8M |
| Net Profit | $206.0M | $-32.7M |
| Gross Margin | 82.2% | 17.6% |
| Operating Margin | 23.0% | -0.5% |
| Net Margin | 17.6% | -4.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 96.4% | -0.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 41.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.51 | $-0.13 |
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 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $682.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $671.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $773.7M | $666.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $594.2M | $665.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $593.2M | $685.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $500.9M | $675.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $659.8M | $684.9M |
| Q1 26 | $206.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $186.4M | $-32.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $251.1M | $-67.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-66.3M | $-54.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-57.5M | $-71.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-83.8M | $-56.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-111.6M | $-186.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-16.9M | $25.0M |
| Q1 26 | 82.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 75.6% | 17.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 84.2% | 19.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 81.6% | 19.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 88.2% | 19.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 82.7% | 19.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 83.6% | 20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 89.8% | 19.2% |
| Q1 26 | 23.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 12.0% | -0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.5% | -5.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.1% | -3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.0% | -5.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -17.7% | -4.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -15.4% | -25.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.4% | -7.9% |
| Q1 26 | 17.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.0% | -4.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.1% | -10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -8.6% | -8.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -9.7% | -10.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -14.1% | -8.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -22.3% | -27.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.6% | 3.7% |
| Q1 26 | $1.51 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.44 | $-0.13 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.84 | $-0.28 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.51 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.44 | $-0.31 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.66 | $-0.20 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.87 | $-0.82 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.13 | $0.11 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.7B | $105.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $2.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.1B | $-1.2B |
| Total Assets | $5.1B | $2.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | $105.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $99.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $103.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $128.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $966.4M | $144.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $157.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $968.5M | $190.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.9B |
| Q1 26 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $789.2M | $-1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $233.9M | $-1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $250.6M | $-1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.4M | $-1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $67.1M | $-1.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $32.4M | $-949.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-3.1M | $-756.2M |
| Q1 26 | $5.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.0B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.9B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.6B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.2B | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.0B | $3.4B |
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 | — | $59.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $56.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 8.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $90.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $163.6M | $59.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $325.1M | $70.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $153.7M | $8.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-118.3M | $12.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-94.7M | $54.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $43.7M | $51.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $124.2M | $24.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $140.3M | $56.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $313.0M | $42.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $139.4M | $-12.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-127.3M | $4.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-103.8M | $34.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $39.5M | $27.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $116.1M | $-14.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 12.8% | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.1% | 6.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.0% | -1.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -21.4% | 0.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -17.5% | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.9% | 4.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 17.6% | -2.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.1% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.0% | 4.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.8% | 3.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.5% | 1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.5% | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.8% | 3.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.2% | 5.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.88× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.29× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.96× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ALNY
| AMVUTTRA | $889.9M | 76% |
| GIVLAARI | $74.4M | 6% |
| OXLUMO | $51.3M | 4% |
| Royalty revenue | $49.0M | 4% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals | $46.3M | 4% |
| Roche | $35.6M | 3% |
| ONPATTRO | $20.5M | 2% |
RXT
| Public Cloud Services Segment | $442.2M | 65% |
| Private Cloud Service Segment | $240.6M | 35% |
