vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and OLAPLEX HOLDINGS, INC. (OLPX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
OLAPLEX HOLDINGS, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($105.1M vs $104.4M, roughly 1.0× AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP). OLAPLEX HOLDINGS, INC. runs the higher net margin — -12.5% vs -55.2%, a 42.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.5% vs 4.3%). OLAPLEX HOLDINGS, INC. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($32.6M vs $-64.0K). Over the past eight quarters, OLAPLEX 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...
Olaplex Holdings, Inc. is a specialty beauty company developing and selling patented bond-repair hair care products. It runs three core segments: professional salon distribution, direct-to-consumer sales, and third-party retail, serving customers across North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific with products that repair and protect damaged hair.
AP vs OLPX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $105.1M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $-13.1M |
| Gross Margin | — | 68.0% |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | -4.3% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | -12.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | 4.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | -48.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $-0.02 |
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 | $105.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $114.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $106.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $97.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $100.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $119.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $103.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $98.9M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $-13.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $11.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $-7.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $465.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $-8.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $14.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $5.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $7.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | 68.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 69.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 71.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 69.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 66.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 68.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 69.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 72.1% |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | -4.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | -1.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 8.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | 3.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | 23.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | 15.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | 19.8% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | -12.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | 9.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | -7.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | 0.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | -8.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | 12.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | 7.8% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $-0.02 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $0.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $-0.01 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $0.00 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $-0.01 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $0.02 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $0.01 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $0.01 |
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 | $318.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | $352.3M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $879.4M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $1.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | 0.40× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $318.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $286.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $289.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $580.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $586.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $538.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $507.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $507.5M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | $352.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | $352.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | $351.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | $649.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | $650.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $651.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | $653.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | $654.4M |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $879.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $888.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $874.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $878.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $874.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $879.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $863.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $855.7M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $1.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $1.8B |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | 0.40× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | 0.40× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | 0.40× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | 0.74× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | 0.74× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | 0.74× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.06× | 0.76× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | 0.76× |
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 | $32.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | $32.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | 31.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | $58.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $32.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $8.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $20.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $-2.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $49.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $33.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $16.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $43.7M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | $32.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $7.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | $20.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | $-3.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | $49.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | $33.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $16.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $43.3M |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | 31.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | 6.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | 19.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | -3.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 48.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | 28.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | 15.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | 43.7% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 0.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 0.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 0.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 0.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 0.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.72× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | -6.27× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.26× | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | 2.81× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 5.64× |
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% |
OLPX
| Sales Channel Directly To Consumer | $43.6M | 42% |
| Sales Channel Through Intermediary Professional | $36.8M | 35% |
| Sales Channel Through Intermediary Specialty Retail | $24.7M | 23% |
