vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and Core Scientific, Inc. (CORZ). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($104.4M vs $79.8M, roughly 1.3× Core Scientific, Inc.). Core Scientific, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 268.5% vs -55.2%, a 323.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.5% vs -16.0%). AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-64.0K vs $-450.8M). Over the past eight quarters, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP's revenue compounded faster (-2.6% CAGR vs -33.3%).
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...
Core Scientific is a leading digital asset and high-performance computing infrastructure provider. It operates large energy-efficient data centers across North America, offering cryptocurrency mining services, colocation hosting for blockchain and AI clients, and custom high-performance computing solutions for enterprise tech segments.
AP vs CORZ — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $79.8M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $214.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | 26.0% |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | -149.5% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | 268.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | -16.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | 180.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $-1.63 |
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 | $79.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $81.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $78.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $79.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $94.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $95.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $141.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $179.3M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $214.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $-144.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $-936.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $576.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $-265.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $-455.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $-902.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $210.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | 26.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 6.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 10.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -0.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 27.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 43.3% |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | -149.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | -67.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | -33.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | -59.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | -41.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | -43.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | -64.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | 30.8% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | 268.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | -177.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | -1191.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | 724.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | -279.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | -477.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | -639.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | 117.5% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $-1.63 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $-0.45 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $1.24 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $0.51 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $-1.17 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $-5.05 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $0.78 |
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 | $311.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $-962.7M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $2.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $311.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $453.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $581.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $697.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $836.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $253.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $96.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $98.1M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $-962.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $-1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $-1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $-308.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $-943.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $-826.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $-1.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $-318.5M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $824.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $664.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $814.0M |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.06× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | — |
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 | $278.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | $-450.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | -565.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 914.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.30× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | $-779.8M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $278.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $131.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $34.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $-45.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $42.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $5.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $1.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $22.2M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | $-450.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $-112.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | $-87.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | $-129.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | $-52.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | $-25.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $-1.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $-9.7M |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | -565.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | -139.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | -111.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | -162.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | -54.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | -26.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | -1.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | -5.4% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 914.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | 301.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 154.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 105.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 100.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 32.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 2.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 17.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.30× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | -0.08× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.11× |
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% |
CORZ
| Other | $36.3M | 46% |
| Digital Asset Self Mining Service | $31.8M | 40% |
| Colocation Service | $11.6M | 15% |
