vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and NACCO INDUSTRIES INC (NC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($104.4M vs $66.8M, roughly 1.6× NACCO INDUSTRIES INC). NACCO INDUSTRIES INC runs the higher net margin — -5.8% vs -55.2%, a 49.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.5% vs -5.2%). Over the past eight quarters, NACCO INDUSTRIES INC's revenue compounded faster (11.9% 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...
NACCO Industries, Inc. is an American publicly traded holding company, headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio. Through a portfolio of mining and natural resources businesses, the company operates under three business segments: Coal Mining, North American Mining, and Minerals Management. The Coal Mining segment operates surface coal mines under long-term contracts with power generation companies and an activated carbon producer pursuant to a service-based business model. The North American Mining se...
AP vs NC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $66.8M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $-3.8M |
| Gross Margin | — | 18.0% |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | 11.3% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | -5.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | -5.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | -150.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $-0.53 |
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 | $66.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $76.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $68.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $65.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $70.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $61.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $52.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $53.3M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $-3.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $13.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $3.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $4.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $7.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $15.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $6.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $4.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | 18.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 13.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 10.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 14.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 12.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 11.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 13.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 13.2% |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | 11.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | 8.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | -0.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 11.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | 5.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | 31.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | 14.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | 8.9% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | -5.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | 17.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | 4.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | 7.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | 10.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | 25.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | 11.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | 8.6% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $-0.53 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $1.78 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $0.44 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $0.66 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $0.99 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $2.14 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $0.81 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $0.61 |
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 | $49.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | $100.8M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $429.2M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $661.2M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | 0.23× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $49.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $52.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $49.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $61.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $72.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $63.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $62.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $61.8M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | $100.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | $99.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | $29.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | $28.4M |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $429.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $426.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $413.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $409.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $404.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $397.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $384.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $381.6M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $661.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $637.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $631.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $634.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $631.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $597.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $560.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $538.0M |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | 0.23× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | 0.25× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.06× | 0.08× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | 0.07× |
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 | $11.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $11.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $42.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $-7.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $5.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $25.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $2.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $4.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $-9.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.19× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -2.39× | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | 1.03× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | 3.33× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.18× | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | 0.68× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -2.14× |
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% |
NC
| Transferred Over Time | $42.7M | 64% |
| Transferred At Point In Time | $24.1M | 36% |
