vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and Clarus Corp (CLAR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($104.4M vs $65.4M, roughly 1.6× Clarus Corp). Clarus Corp runs the higher net margin — -47.8% vs -55.2%, a 7.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.5% vs -8.4%). Clarus Corp produced more free cash flow last quarter ($11.6M vs $-64.0K). Over the past eight quarters, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP's revenue compounded faster (-2.6% CAGR vs -2.9%).
Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation is a specialty steel manufacturer headquartered in Downtown Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It is one of several companies to bear the Ampco name, and it should not be confused with the Milwaukee-based copper base alloy producer, Ampco Metal Inc.; the Miami-based cabinetry company; the Swiss aluminum corporation; or the Dallas-based tool company. Ampco was formed in 1929 and is a conglomerate made up of several previously established small steel makers. Five small compa...
Clarus Corp is a global designer, manufacturer, and distributor of high-performance outdoor recreation, climbing, camping, and lifestyle products. It manages a portfolio of leading consumer brands, serving outdoor enthusiasts, professional athletes, and retail partners across North America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region, with a focus on innovative, durable gear for active lifestyles.
AP vs CLAR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $65.4M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $-31.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | 27.7% |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | -59.6% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | -47.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | -8.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | 52.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $-0.81 |
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 | $104.4M | $65.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $69.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $55.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $60.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $71.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $67.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $56.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $69.3M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $-31.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $-1.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $-8.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $-5.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $-65.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $-3.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $-5.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $21.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | 27.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 35.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 35.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 34.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 33.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 35.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 36.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 35.9% |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | -59.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | -4.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | -19.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | -11.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | -70.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | -8.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | -14.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | -9.8% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | -47.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | -2.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | -15.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | -8.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | -91.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | -4.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | -9.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | 31.6% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $-0.81 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $-0.14 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $-1.72 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $-0.14 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $0.57 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $10.7M | $36.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | $0 |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $196.4M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $249.0M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | 0.00× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $36.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $29.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $28.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $41.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $45.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $36.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $46.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $47.5M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | $0 | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | $2.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | $1.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | $1.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | $1.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | $37.0K |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $196.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $225.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $225.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $229.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $233.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $308.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $307.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $310.4M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $249.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $283.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $286.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $292.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $294.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $375.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $369.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $377.0M |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | 0.00× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | 0.01× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | 0.01× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | 0.01× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | 0.01× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.06× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | 0.00× |
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 | $2.7M | $12.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | $11.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | 17.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 1.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | $-9.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $12.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $-5.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $-9.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $-2.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $16.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $-8.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $834.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $-16.4M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | $11.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $-7.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | $-11.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | $-3.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | $14.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | $-9.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $-744.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $-18.3M |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | 17.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | -10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | -20.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | -5.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 20.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | -14.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | -1.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | -26.3% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 1.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 3.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 2.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 3.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 1.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 2.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 2.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -0.75× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AP
| Forged And Cast Mill Rolls | $67.0M | 64% |
| Air Handling Systems | $14.3M | 14% |
| Heat Exchange Coils | $13.1M | 13% |
| Centrifugal Pumps | $10.3M | 10% |
| Forged Engineered Products | $4.0M | 4% |
CLAR
| Other | $37.1M | 57% |
| Outdoor Segment | $25.3M | 39% |
| Adventure Segment | $3.0M | 5% |
