vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and Purple Innovation, Inc. (PRPL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Purple Innovation, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($140.7M vs $104.4M, roughly 1.3× AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP). Purple Innovation, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -2.3% vs -55.2%, a 53.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.5% vs 9.1%). AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-64.0K vs $-7.8M). Over the past eight quarters, Purple Innovation, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (8.3% 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...
Purple Carrot is a Needham, Massachusetts-based, and 100% plant-based meal kit company. Founded by Andy Levitt, it offers both prepared meals as well as meal kits to subscribers weekly. As stated in a 2022 article in Cosmopolitan, “each Purple Carrot meal kit results in 72% less carbon being released into the atmosphere as compared to the standard American meal.”
AP vs PRPL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $140.7M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $-3.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | 41.9% |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | -1.6% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | -2.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | 9.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | 62.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $0.03 |
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 | $140.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $118.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $105.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $104.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $129.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $118.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $120.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $120.0M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $-3.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $-11.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $-17.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $-19.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $-8.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $-39.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $27.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $-50.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 41.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 42.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 35.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 39.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 42.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 29.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 40.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 34.8% |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | -1.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | -10.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | -13.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | -13.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | -6.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | -39.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | -12.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | -19.3% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | -2.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | -9.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | -16.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | -18.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | -6.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | -33.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | -41.8% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $0.03 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $0.11 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $0.16 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $0.18 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $0.08 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $0.36 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $0.00 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $0.47 |
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 | $24.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | $126.7M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $-29.7M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $296.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $24.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $32.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $34.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $21.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $29.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $23.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $23.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $34.5M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | $126.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | $70.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $50.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $-29.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $-26.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $-15.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $1.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $20.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $28.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $66.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $65.5M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $296.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $302.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $303.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $293.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $307.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $309.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $362.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $382.1M |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | 3.50× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | 1.82× | ||
| 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 | $-5.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | $-7.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | -5.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 1.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | $-41.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $-5.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $-968.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $-4.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $-23.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $6.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $1.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $-8.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $-16.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | $-7.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $-1.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | $-7.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | $-25.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | $5.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | $101.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $-11.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $-19.9M |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | -5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | -1.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | -6.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | -24.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 4.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | -9.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | -16.5% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 1.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | 0.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 2.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 2.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 0.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 1.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 2.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | -330.22× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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% |
PRPL
| Cost Of Revenues | $81.7M | 58% |
| Other | $59.0M | 42% |
