vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and El Pollo Loco Holdings, Inc. (LOCO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
El Pollo Loco Holdings, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($123.5M vs $104.4M, roughly 1.2× AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP). El Pollo Loco Holdings, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 5.3% vs -55.2%, a 60.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.5% vs 8.1%). El Pollo Loco Holdings, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($5.1M vs $-64.0K). Over the past eight quarters, El Pollo Loco Holdings, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (3.1% CAGR vs -2.6%).
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...
El Pollo Loco, Inc., is a restaurant chain based in the United States, specializing in Mexican-style grilled chicken. Restaurant service consists of dine-in and take-out, with some locations offering drive-through options. The company is headquartered in Costa Mesa, California, and operates about 500 company-owned and franchised restaurants in the Southwestern United States.
AP vs LOCO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $123.5M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $6.5M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | 8.3% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | 5.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | 8.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | 9.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $0.22 |
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 | $123.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $121.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $125.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $119.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $114.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $120.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $122.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $116.2M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $6.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $7.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $7.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $5.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $6.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $6.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $7.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $5.9M |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | 9.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | 9.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 7.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | 7.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | 8.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | 10.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | 8.3% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | 5.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | 4.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | 5.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | 5.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | 6.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | 5.1% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $0.22 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $0.25 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $0.24 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $0.19 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $0.21 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $0.21 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $0.25 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $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 | $10.7M | $6.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | $51.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $291.1M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $606.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | 0.18× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $6.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $10.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $9.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $4.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $2.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $7.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $10.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $9.1M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | $51.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | $61.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | $69.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | $73.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | $71.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $76.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | $87.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | $80.0M |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $291.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $282.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $274.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $265.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $260.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $255.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $248.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $256.3M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $606.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $602.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $596.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $590.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $592.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $590.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $593.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $598.0M |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | 0.18× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | 0.22× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | 0.25× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | 0.27× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | 0.27× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | 0.30× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.06× | 0.35× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | 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 | $2.7M | $13.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | $5.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | 4.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 7.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 2.13× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | $25.4M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $13.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $15.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $14.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $4.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $5.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $13.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $17.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $11.2M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | $5.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $9.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | $9.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | $1.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | $1.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | $9.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $10.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $7.0M |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | 4.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | 8.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | 7.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | 1.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 1.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | 7.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | 8.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | 6.0% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 7.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | 4.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 4.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 2.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 3.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 3.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 5.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 3.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.13× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.08× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.99× | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | 0.86× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | 0.95× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.11× | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | 2.22× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.89× |
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% |
LOCO
| Services | $102.4M | 83% |
| Franchise | $13.0M | 11% |
| Franchise Advertising Fee | $8.1M | 7% |
