vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Amentum Holdings, Inc. (AMTM) and PIONEER POWER SOLUTIONS, INC. (PPSI), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Amentum Holdings, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.2B vs $5.6M, roughly 575.1× PIONEER POWER SOLUTIONS, INC.). Amentum Holdings, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 1.4% vs -24.7%, a 26.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Amentum Holdings, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-5.2% vs -42.3%). PIONEER POWER SOLUTIONS, INC. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-2.2M vs $-142.0M). Over the past eight quarters, PIONEER POWER SOLUTIONS, INC.'s revenue compounded faster (30.3% CAGR vs 25.6%).
Jacobs Solutions Inc. is an American international technical professional services firm based in Dallas. The company provides engineering, technical, professional, and construction services as well as scientific and specialty consulting for a broad range of clients globally, including companies, organizations, and government agencies. Jacobs has consistently ranked No. 1 on both Engineering News-Record (ENR)'s 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 Top 500 Design Firms and Trenchless Technolo...
Caterpillar Energy Solutions GmbH, is a mechanical engineering company based in Mannheim, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. It was known as MWM GmbH Motoren-Werke Mannheim (MWM) until November 2013. In 2009 the company was the third-largest producer by revenue of gas and diesel engines.
AMTM vs PPSI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 2026 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.2B | $5.6M |
| Net Profit | $44.0M | $-1.4M |
| Gross Margin | 10.1% | 23.5% |
| Operating Margin | 4.3% | -19.4% |
| Net Margin | 1.4% | -24.7% |
| Revenue YoY | -5.2% | -42.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 266.7% | -103.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.18 | $-0.12 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q1 26 | $3.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.9B | $5.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $6.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.6B | $8.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.5B | $6.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.4B | $9.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.2B | $6.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.1B | $3.4M |
| Q1 26 | $44.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $40.0M | $-1.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-2.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.0M | $-1.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0M | $-929.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.0M | $36.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $26.0M | $-1.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-26.0M | $-2.3M |
| Q1 26 | 10.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 10.6% | 23.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.3% | 15.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.5% | 2.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.6% | 28.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.0% | 23.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.6% | 18.9% |
| Q1 26 | 4.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.4% | -19.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -21.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.9% | -20.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.2% | -34.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.9% | -11.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.2% | -11.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.2% | -51.1% |
| Q1 26 | 1.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.0% | -24.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -34.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.3% | -15.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.1% | -13.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.4% | 372.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.2% | -17.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.2% | -67.2% |
| Q1 26 | $0.18 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.16 | $-0.12 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.21 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.04 | $-0.12 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.02 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.05 | $3.31 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.31 | $-0.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.29 | $-0.21 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $247.0M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.9B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $4.6B | $29.3M |
| Total Assets | $11.2B | $35.5M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.86× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | $247.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $437.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $738.0M | $18.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $546.0M | $25.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $522.0M | $41.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $452.0M | $3.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $6.5M |
| Q1 26 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.5B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.7B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.7B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $4.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.5B | $29.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $30.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.5B | $33.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.4B | $34.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.5B | $35.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.5B | $14.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $303.0M | $15.8M |
| Q1 26 | $11.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $11.5B | $35.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $37.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $11.8B | $39.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.0B | $47.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.9B | $66.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.0B | $40.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $38.0M |
| Q1 26 | 0.86× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.88× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.01× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.06× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.05× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.05× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $-136.0M | $-1.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-142.0M | $-2.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -4.4% | -38.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 0.2% | 20.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | -3.09× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $272.0M | $-8.5M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | $-136.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $270.0M | $-1.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-817.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $106.0M | $-5.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $57.0M | $1.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $110.0M | $-2.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-2.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $571.0K |
| Q1 26 | $-142.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $261.0M | $-2.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-1.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $100.0M | $-5.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $53.0M | $907.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $102.0M | $-4.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-3.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $170.0K |
| Q1 26 | -4.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 6.6% | -38.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -23.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.8% | -67.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.5% | 13.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.0% | -46.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -53.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 5.0% |
| Q1 26 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.2% | 20.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 11.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.2% | 1.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.1% | 8.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.2% | 25.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 10.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 11.8% |
| Q1 26 | -3.09× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 6.75× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.60× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 14.25× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.17× | -0.06× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AMTM
| Global Engineering Solutions Segment | $1.9B | 59% |
| Other U.S.Government Agencies | $400.0M | 12% |
| Fixed Price Contract | $380.0M | 12% |
| Commercial And International | $226.0M | 7% |
| Time And Materials Contract | $171.0M | 5% |
| Sales Channel Through Intermediary | $78.0M | 2% |
| Equity Method Investee | $50.0M | 2% |
PPSI
Segment breakdown not available.
