vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and SHENANDOAH TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO (SHEN). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($104.4M vs $91.6M, roughly 1.1× SHENANDOAH TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO). SHENANDOAH TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO runs the higher net margin — -5.9% vs -55.2%, a 49.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.5% vs 7.2%). AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-64.0K vs $-78.6M). Over the past eight quarters, SHENANDOAH TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO's revenue compounded faster (15.0% 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...
Shenandoah Telecommunications Co is a U.S. regional telecom provider offering broadband internet, wireless voice/data services, digital cable TV, and fiber-optic solutions. It serves residential, small business and enterprise clients across Mid-Atlantic states, focusing on underserved rural and suburban markets in Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania.
AP vs SHEN — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $91.6M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $-5.4M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | -1.0% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | -5.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | 7.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | -95.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $-0.13 |
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 | $91.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $89.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $88.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $87.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $85.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $87.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $85.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $69.2M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $-5.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $-9.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $-9.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $-9.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $-2.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $-5.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $-12.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $214.7M |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | -1.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | -8.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | -10.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | -6.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | -6.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | -4.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | -18.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | -4.0% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | -5.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | -10.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | -10.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | -10.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | -3.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | -6.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | -15.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | 310.0% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $-0.13 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $-0.20 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $-0.34 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $-0.13 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $-0.24 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $4.25 |
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 | $27.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | $642.4M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $880.8M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $1.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | 0.73× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $27.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $22.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $29.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $87.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $46.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $43.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $43.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $389.7M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | $642.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | $535.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | $513.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | $515.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | $418.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $345.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | $297.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | $298.7M |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $880.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $892.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $902.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $910.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $918.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $925.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $933.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $871.6M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $1.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $1.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $1.4B |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | 0.73× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | 0.60× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | 0.57× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | 0.57× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | 0.46× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | 0.37× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.06× | 0.32× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | 0.34× |
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 | $28.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | $-78.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | -85.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 117.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | $-257.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $28.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $30.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $20.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $20.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $20.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $24.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $2.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $15.2M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | $-78.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $-51.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | $-65.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | $-62.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | $-72.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | $-51.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $-78.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $-54.9M |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | -85.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | -57.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | -73.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | -71.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | -84.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | -58.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | -91.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | -79.3% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 117.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | 91.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 97.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 94.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 108.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 86.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 94.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 101.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.07× |
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% |
SHEN
| Residential And SMB Incumbent Broadband | $41.5M | 45% |
| Residential And SMB Glo Fiber Expansion Markets | $23.0M | 25% |
| Commercial Fiber | $20.3M | 22% |
| RLEC Other | $6.8M | 7% |
