vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMKOR TECHNOLOGY, INC. (AMKR) and CLEAN HARBORS INC (CLH). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
AMKOR TECHNOLOGY, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.7B vs $1.5B, roughly 1.1× CLEAN HARBORS INC). CLEAN HARBORS INC runs the higher net margin — 5.8% vs 4.9%, a 0.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMKOR TECHNOLOGY, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (27.5% vs 4.8%). Over the past eight quarters, AMKOR TECHNOLOGY, INC.'s revenue compounded faster (7.4% CAGR vs 4.4%).
Amkor Technology, Inc. is a semiconductor product packaging and test services provider. The company has been headquartered in Arizona, since 2005, when it was moved from West Chester, Pennsylvania, also in the United States. The company's Arizona headquarters was originally in Chandler, then later moved to Tempe. The company was founded in 1968 and, as of 2022, has approximately 31,000 employees worldwide and a reported $7.1 billion in sales.
Clean Harbors, Inc., headquartered in Norwell, Massachusetts, is a provider of waste management and industrial services for commercial customers, specializing in the collection, transportation, treatment and disposal of hazardous waste, but also offering services for non-hazardous waste. The company has 870 operating locations in 630 properties in the U.S. and Canada including a network of over 100 waste disposal facilities such as incinerators, landfills, treatment, storage and disposal faci...
AMKR vs CLH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.7B | $1.5B |
| Net Profit | $83.0M | $86.6M |
| Gross Margin | 14.2% | 30.6% |
| Operating Margin | 5.9% | 10.6% |
| Net Margin | 4.9% | 5.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 27.5% | 4.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 295.2% | 3.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.33 | $1.62 |
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 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.5B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $1.6B |
| Q1 26 | $83.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $171.8M | $86.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $126.6M | $118.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $54.4M | $126.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.1M | $58.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $105.6M | $84.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $122.6M | $115.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $66.9M | $133.3M |
| Q1 26 | 14.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 16.7% | 30.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.3% | 32.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.0% | 33.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 11.9% | 28.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.1% | 29.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.6% | 31.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.5% | 33.3% |
| Q1 26 | 5.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 9.8% | 10.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.0% | 12.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.1% | 13.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.4% | 7.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.3% | 9.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.0% | 12.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.6% | 13.9% |
| Q1 26 | 4.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 9.1% | 5.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.4% | 7.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.6% | 8.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.6% | 4.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.5% | 5.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.6% | 7.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.6% | 8.6% |
| Q1 26 | $0.33 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.68 | $1.62 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.51 | $2.21 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.22 | $2.36 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.09 | $1.09 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.43 | $1.55 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.49 | $2.12 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.27 | $2.46 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.8B | $127.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.3B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $4.6B | $2.7B |
| Total Assets | $8.3B | $7.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.28× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $1.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.0B | $127.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.1B | $91.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.0B | $98.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | $105.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $102.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $82.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $91.3M |
| Q1 26 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $4.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.5B | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.3B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.2B | $2.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.1B | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.2B | $2.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.0B | $2.4B |
| Q1 26 | $8.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $8.1B | $7.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.2B | $7.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.7B | $7.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.9B | $7.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.9B | $7.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.0B | $7.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.9B | $7.1B |
| Q1 26 | 0.28× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
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 | $145.1M | $355.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $233.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 15.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 29.0% | 8.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.75× | 4.10× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $441.8M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $145.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $644.5M | $355.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $168.5M | $302.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $258.5M | $208.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $24.1M | $1.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $537.6M | $303.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $164.2M | $239.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $224.8M | $216.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $212.4M | $233.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-77.9M | $207.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $112.3M | $118.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-55.7M | $-117.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $251.9M | $241.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-31.3M | $142.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.4M | $80.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 11.2% | 15.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -3.9% | 13.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.4% | 7.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.2% | -8.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.5% | 16.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -1.7% | 9.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 5.2% |
| Q1 26 | 29.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 22.9% | 8.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.4% | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.7% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.0% | 8.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.5% | 4.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.5% | 6.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.4% | 8.7% |
| Q1 26 | 1.75× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.75× | 4.10× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.33× | 2.54× | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.75× | 1.64× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.14× | 0.03× | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.09× | 3.62× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.34× | 2.08× | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.36× | 1.62× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AMKR
| Advanced products (1) | $1.4B | 81% |
| Mainstream products (2) | $313.0M | 19% |
CLH
| Technical Services | $479.3M | 32% |
| Safetly Kleen Environmental Services | $252.9M | 17% |
| Fieldand Emergency Response | $246.6M | 16% |
| Products | $205.3M | 14% |
| Safety Kleen Sustainability Solutions Segment | $188.4M | 13% |
| Safety Kleen Oil | $132.6M | 9% |
