vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ALPHA & OMEGA SEMICONDUCTOR Ltd (AOSL) and Forestar Group Inc. (FOR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Forestar Group Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($273.0M vs $162.3M, roughly 1.7× ALPHA & OMEGA SEMICONDUCTOR Ltd). Forestar Group Inc. runs the higher net margin — 5.6% vs -8.2%, a 13.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Forestar Group Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (9.0% vs -6.3%). ALPHA & OMEGA SEMICONDUCTOR Ltd produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-23.1M vs $-157.1M). Over the past eight quarters, ALPHA & OMEGA SEMICONDUCTOR Ltd's revenue compounded faster (4.0% CAGR vs -9.6%).
Alpha & Omega Semiconductor Ltd designs, manufactures and markets a broad portfolio of power semiconductors, including power MOSFETs, IGBTs, analog ICs and power management modules. Its products are applied across consumer electronics, industrial equipment, automotive systems, telecom and computing segments, with sales networks covering major global markets.
Forestar Group Inc. is a residential lot development company based in Arlington, Texas. The company has operations in 51 markets in 21 states and delivered 11,518 residential lots during the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2020. The company is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange and in October 2017 became a majority-owned subsidiary of D.R. Horton, Inc., the largest homebuilder by volume in the United States since 2002. The company primarily acquires entitled real estate and...
AOSL vs FOR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $162.3M | $273.0M |
| Net Profit | $-13.3M | $15.4M |
| Gross Margin | 21.5% | 20.1% |
| Operating Margin | -8.4% | 7.6% |
| Net Margin | -8.2% | 5.6% |
| Revenue YoY | -6.3% | 9.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -101.0% | -6.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.45 | $0.30 |
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 | $162.3M | $273.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $182.5M | $670.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $176.5M | $390.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $164.6M | $351.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $173.2M | $250.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $181.9M | $551.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $161.3M | $318.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $150.1M | $333.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-13.3M | $15.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.1M | $86.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-77.1M | $32.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.8M | $31.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-6.6M | $16.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.5M | $81.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-2.7M | $38.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-11.2M | $45.0M |
| Q4 25 | 21.5% | 20.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 23.5% | 22.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.4% | 20.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.4% | 22.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 23.1% | 22.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 24.5% | 23.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 25.7% | 22.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 23.7% | 24.9% |
| Q4 25 | -8.4% | 7.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.5% | 16.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.6% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.5% | 11.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.4% | 8.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.1% | 19.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.9% | 16.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -7.0% | 17.6% |
| Q4 25 | -8.2% | 5.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.2% | 13.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -43.7% | 8.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.6% | 9.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.8% | 6.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -1.4% | 14.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.7% | 12.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -7.5% | 13.5% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.45 | $0.30 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.07 | $1.70 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.61 | $0.65 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.37 | $0.62 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.23 | $0.32 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.09 | $1.59 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.09 | $0.76 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.39 | $0.89 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $196.3M | $211.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $793.2M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $818.8M | $1.8B |
| Total Assets | $1.0B | $3.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.44× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $196.3M | $211.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $223.5M | $379.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $153.1M | $189.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $169.4M | $174.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $182.6M | $132.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $176.0M | $481.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $175.1M | $359.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $174.4M | $416.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $793.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $802.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.9M | $872.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $872.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $806.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $706.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $26.7M | $706.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $705.7M |
| Q4 25 | $818.8M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $834.1M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $822.3M | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $886.3M | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $902.6M | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $895.3M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $891.6M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $888.9M | $1.5B |
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0B | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.2B | $2.6B |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.44× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.45× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.02× | 0.52× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.53× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.50× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.44× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.03× | 0.47× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.48× |
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 | $-8.1M | $-157.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-23.1M | $-157.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -14.2% | -57.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 9.2% | 0.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | -10.19× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-40.9M | $93.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-8.1M | $-157.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.2M | $256.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.8M | $15.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.4M | $-19.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.1M | $-450.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.0M | $119.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.1M | $-61.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $28.2M | $-59.2M |
| Q4 25 | $-23.1M | $-157.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $420.0K | $255.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-17.2M | $15.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.1M | $-20.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.1M | $118.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-210.0K | $-62.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $20.5M | $-59.8M |
| Q4 25 | -14.2% | -57.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.2% | 38.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -9.7% | 3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.6% | -5.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.3% | 21.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.1% | -19.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.7% | -17.9% |
| Q4 25 | 9.2% | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.4% | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.1% | 0.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.1% | 0.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.3% | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.8% | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.5% | 0.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.2% | 0.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | -10.19× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.95× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.48× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -0.63× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -27.27× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.46× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -1.59× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -1.32× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AOSL
| Power Discrete | $101.0M | 62% |
| Power Ic | $58.8M | 36% |
| Packaging And Testing Services | $2.5M | 2% |
FOR
| D.R.Horton Inc. | $183.8M | 67% |
| Other | $89.2M | 33% |
