vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of A. O. Smith (AOS) and Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp (ZWS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
A. O. Smith is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($912.5M vs $407.2M, roughly 2.2× Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp). A. O. Smith runs the higher net margin — 13.7% vs 10.3%, a 3.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (9.8% vs 0.0%). Over the past eight quarters, Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp's revenue compounded faster (4.4% CAGR vs -3.4%).
A. O. Smith Corporation is an American manufacturer of both residential and commercial water heaters and boilers, and the largest manufacturer and marketer of water heaters in North America. It also supplies water treatment and purification products in the Asian market. The company has 27 locations worldwide, including five manufacturing facilities in North America, as well as plants in Bengaluru in India, Nanjing in China and Veldhoven in The Netherlands.
Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp designs, manufactures, and distributes a wide range of water management and dispensing products, including commercial plumbing fixtures, drinking fountains, water filtration systems, and flow control components. It serves commercial, residential, industrial, and public infrastructure markets primarily across North America, with a focus on delivering sustainable, water-efficient solutions for diverse end-user needs.
AOS vs ZWS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $912.5M | $407.2M |
| Net Profit | $125.4M | $42.1M |
| Gross Margin | 38.4% | 44.4% |
| Operating Margin | 17.9% | 14.8% |
| Net Margin | 13.7% | 10.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 0.0% | 9.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 14.3% | 15.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.89 | $0.24 |
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 | $912.5M | $407.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $942.5M | $455.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0B | $444.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $963.9M | $388.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $912.4M | $370.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $902.6M | $410.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0B | $412.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $978.8M | $373.8M |
| Q4 25 | $125.4M | $42.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $132.0M | $61.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $152.2M | $50.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $136.6M | $43.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $109.7M | $36.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $120.1M | $43.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $156.2M | $46.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $147.6M | $34.3M |
| Q4 25 | 38.4% | 44.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 38.7% | 44.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 39.3% | 45.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 38.9% | 46.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 37.1% | 43.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 37.4% | 46.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 38.7% | 45.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 39.3% | 45.5% |
| Q4 25 | 17.9% | 14.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.6% | 17.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.4% | 17.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.1% | 16.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.1% | 13.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.5% | 17.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.9% | 17.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 22.0% | 14.2% |
| Q4 25 | 13.7% | 10.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.0% | 13.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.0% | 11.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 14.2% | 11.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.0% | 9.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.3% | 10.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.2% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.1% | 9.2% |
| Q4 25 | $0.89 | $0.24 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.94 | $0.36 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.07 | $0.29 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.95 | $0.26 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.75 | $0.21 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.82 | $0.25 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.06 | $0.27 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.00 | $0.19 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $193.2M | $300.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $155.0M | $496.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.9B | $1.6B |
| Total Assets | $3.1B | $2.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.08× | 0.31× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $193.2M | $300.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $172.8M | $260.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $177.9M | $201.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $200.2M | $144.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $276.1M | $198.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $255.6M | $187.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $233.3M | $162.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $303.1M | $157.1M |
| Q4 25 | $155.0M | $496.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $496.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $495.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $495.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $193.2M | $495.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $495.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $495.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $495.4M |
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.8B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.9B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.9B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.9B | $1.6B |
| Q4 25 | $3.1B | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.3B | $2.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.2B | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.2B | $2.7B |
| Q4 25 | 0.08× | 0.31× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.31× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.32× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.32× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.10× | 0.31× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.31× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.31× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.31× |
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 | $183.1M | $91.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $165.5M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 18.1% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.9% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.46× | 2.18× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $546.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $183.1M | $91.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $255.4M | $101.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $139.6M | $110.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $38.7M | $42.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $221.9M | $63.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $195.9M | $90.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $57.4M | $85.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $106.6M | $53.9M |
| Q4 25 | $165.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $240.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $122.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $191.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $163.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $34.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $84.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | 18.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.6% | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.46× | 2.18× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.93× | 1.64× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.92× | 2.19× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.28× | 0.98× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.02× | 1.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.63× | 2.09× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.37× | 1.85× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.72× | 1.57× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AOS
| North America Segment | $713.7M | 78% |
| Rest Of World | $158.3M | 17% |
| Other | $40.5M | 4% |
ZWS
Segment breakdown not available.
