vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. (SHLS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($148.3M vs $104.4M, roughly 1.4× AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP). Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 5.5% vs -55.2%, a 60.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Shoals Technologies Group, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (38.6% vs 11.5%). AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-64.0K vs $-11.3M). Over the past eight quarters, Shoals Technologies Group, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (27.8% 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...
Shoals Technologies Group is a leading provider of electrical balance of systems solutions for renewable energy and e-mobility. It supplies connectivity components for solar projects, energy storage systems and EV charging infrastructure, serving clients across North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific.
AP vs SHLS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $148.3M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $8.1M |
| Gross Margin | — | 31.6% |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | 11.7% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | 5.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | 38.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | 3.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $0.05 |
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 | $148.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $135.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $110.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $80.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $107.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $102.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $99.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $90.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $8.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $11.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $13.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $-282.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $7.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $-267.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $11.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $4.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | 31.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 37.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 37.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 35.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 37.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 24.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 40.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 40.2% |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | 11.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | 13.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | 14.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 5.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | 15.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | 4.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | 18.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | 12.8% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | 5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | 8.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | 12.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | -0.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | 7.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | -0.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | 11.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | 5.3% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $0.05 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $0.07 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $0.08 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $0.00 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $0.04 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $0.00 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $0.07 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $0.03 |
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 | $7.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $600.0M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $904.1M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $7.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $8.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $4.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $35.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $23.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $11.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $3.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $15.2M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | $141.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | $141.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $141.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | $146.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | $168.8M |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $600.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $589.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $575.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $558.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $556.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $545.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $544.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $554.0M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $904.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $851.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $795.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $788.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $793.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $801.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $788.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $825.3M |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | 0.25× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | 0.25× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | 0.26× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.06× | 0.27× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | 0.30× |
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 | $-4.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | $-11.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | -7.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 4.8% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | -0.50× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | $-16.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $-4.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $19.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $-13.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $15.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $14.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $15.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $37.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $12.9M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | $-11.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $9.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | $-26.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | $12.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | $12.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | $13.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $35.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $10.4M |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | -7.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | 6.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | -23.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | 15.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 11.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | 13.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | 36.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | 11.4% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 4.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | 7.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 11.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 4.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 1.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 2.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 2.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 2.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.50× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.63× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -1.00× | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | 1.79× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | 3.21× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.69× |
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% |
SHLS
| System Solutions | $122.0M | 82% |
| Components | $26.3M | 18% |
