vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of American Homes 4 Rent (AMH) and Select Water Solutions, Inc. (WTTR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
American Homes 4 Rent is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($455.0M vs $346.5M, roughly 1.3× Select Water Solutions, Inc.). American Homes 4 Rent runs the higher net margin — 31.7% vs -0.1%, a 31.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, American Homes 4 Rent posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.2% vs -0.7%). American Homes 4 Rent produced more free cash flow last quarter ($823.7M vs $-6.0M). Over the past eight quarters, American Homes 4 Rent's revenue compounded faster (3.6% CAGR vs -2.8%).
American Homes 4 RentAMHEarnings & Financial Report
American Homes 4 Rent, doing business as AMH, is a real estate investment trust based in Las Vegas, Nevada, that invests in single-family rental homes. As of December 31, 2019, the company owned 52,552 homes in 22 states. Its largest concentrations are in Atlanta, Dallas-Fort Worth, and Charlotte, North Carolina.
Select Water Solutions, Inc. is a leading provider of end-to-end water management, fluid handling, and environmental sustainability services primarily catering to the North American onshore oil and gas exploration and production sector. Its core offerings include water sourcing, treatment, recycling, disposal, and chemical solutions to help clients cut operational costs and reduce environmental footprint.
AMH vs WTTR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $455.0M | $346.5M |
| Net Profit | $144.3M | $-346.0K |
| Gross Margin | — | 13.1% |
| Operating Margin | — | -0.1% |
| Net Margin | 31.7% | -0.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 4.2% | -0.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 0.3% | 78.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.33 | — |
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 | $455.0M | $346.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $478.5M | $322.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $457.5M | $364.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $459.3M | $374.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $436.6M | $349.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $445.1M | $371.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $423.5M | $365.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $423.6M | $366.5M |
| Q4 25 | $144.3M | $-346.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $116.8M | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $123.6M | $10.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $128.7M | $8.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $143.9M | $-1.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $87.6M | $15.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $108.5M | $12.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $128.1M | $3.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | 13.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 13.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 15.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 14.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 12.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 16.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 16.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 14.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -0.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 4.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 6.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.9% |
| Q4 25 | 31.7% | -0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.4% | 0.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 27.0% | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 28.0% | 2.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 33.0% | -0.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.7% | 4.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 25.6% | 3.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 30.2% | 1.0% |
| Q4 25 | $0.33 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.27 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.28 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.30 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.33 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.20 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.25 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.30 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $108.5M | $18.1M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $5.1B | $320.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $7.0B | $805.6M |
| Total Assets | $13.2B | $1.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.72× | 0.40× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $108.5M | $18.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $45.6M | $17.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $323.3M | $51.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $69.7M | $27.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $199.4M | $20.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $162.5M | $10.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $718.4M | $16.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $124.8M | $12.8M |
| Q4 25 | $5.1B | $320.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.8B | $305.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.2B | $275.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.9B | $250.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.0B | $85.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.5B | $80.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.0B | $90.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5B | $75.0M |
| Q4 25 | $7.0B | $805.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.2B | $808.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.2B | $799.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.2B | $793.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.2B | $793.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.0B | $796.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.0B | $782.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.0B | $770.0M |
| Q4 25 | $13.2B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.3B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.6B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.3B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.4B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.8B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.3B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $12.8B | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | 0.72× | 0.40× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.68× | 0.38× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.72× | 0.34× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.69× | 0.32× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.70× | 0.11× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.64× | 0.10× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.71× | 0.12× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.64× | 0.10× |
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 | $864.3M | $65.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $823.7M | $-6.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 181.0% | -1.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 8.9% | 20.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 5.99× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.5B | $-79.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $864.3M | $65.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $223.3M | $71.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $271.9M | $82.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $223.4M | $-5.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $811.5M | $67.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $233.6M | $51.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $274.0M | $83.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $201.8M | $32.1M |
| Q4 25 | $823.7M | $-6.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $214.5M | $-23.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $257.7M | $3.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $215.9M | $-53.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $777.5M | $12.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $225.3M | $16.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $263.3M | $34.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $191.0M | $-1.6M |
| Q4 25 | 181.0% | -1.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 44.8% | -7.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 56.3% | 0.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 47.0% | -14.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 178.1% | 3.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 50.6% | 4.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 62.2% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 45.1% | -0.4% |
| Q4 25 | 8.9% | 20.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.8% | 29.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.1% | 21.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.6% | 12.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.8% | 15.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.9% | 9.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 13.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 9.2% |
| Q4 25 | 5.99× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.91× | 26.72× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.20× | 7.76× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.74× | -0.61× | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.64× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.67× | 3.29× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.52× | 6.46× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.58× | 8.86× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AMH
Segment breakdown not available.
WTTR
| Water Services | $178.3M | 51% |
| Marcellus Utica | $38.6M | 11% |
| Rockies | $38.3M | 11% |
| Eagle Ford | $28.2M | 8% |
| Midcon | $23.0M | 7% |
| Haynesville E.Texas | $19.1M | 6% |
| Bakken | $17.3M | 5% |
| Eliminations And Other Geographical Regions | $3.6M | 1% |
