vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP (AP) and UNITIL CORP (UTL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
UNITIL CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($161.5M vs $104.4M, roughly 1.5× AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP). UNITIL CORP runs the higher net margin — 11.8% vs -55.2%, a 67.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, UNITIL CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (26.7% vs 11.5%). AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-64.0K vs $-36.3M). Over the past eight quarters, AMPCO PITTSBURGH CORP's revenue compounded faster (-2.6% CAGR vs -4.9%).
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...
Unitil Corporation is an interstate electricity and natural gas utility company that provides services for New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Maine. Its earliest predecessor company, the Portland Gas Light Company, was founded in Maine in 1849. The current company was set up in 1984 and is based in New Hampshire. With a market cap of 686.51M, it provides electric services to about 102,400 customers and natural gas to over 75,900 customers. The service territory of Unitil includes business distr...
AP vs UTL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $104.4M | $161.5M |
| Net Profit | $-57.7M | $19.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -54.0% | 21.5% |
| Net Margin | -55.2% | 11.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.5% | 26.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1958.9% | 21.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.87 | $1.05 |
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 | $161.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.7M | $101.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.9M | $102.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.2M | $170.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.6M | $127.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.1M | $92.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.1M | $95.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.0M | $178.7M |
| Q4 25 | $-57.7M | $19.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2M | $-300.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $4.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $27.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $15.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.0M | $0 | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | $4.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.7M | $27.2M |
| Q4 25 | -54.0% | 21.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | 6.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | 13.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 27.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | 22.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | 6.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.7% | 13.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | 24.7% |
| Q4 25 | -55.2% | 11.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.1% | -0.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | 3.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | 16.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | 12.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | 4.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.5% | 15.2% |
| Q4 25 | $-2.87 | $1.05 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $-0.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.36 | $0.25 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $1.69 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $0.97 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $0.00 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $0.27 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $1.69 |
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 | $15.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $117.9M | $670.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $32.6M | $609.6M |
| Total Assets | $495.4M | $2.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.61× | 1.10× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $15.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.0M | $14.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $8.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | $10.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $6.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $6.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.9M | $2.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8M | $6.3M |
| Q4 25 | $117.9M | $670.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $119.0M | $670.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $115.9M | $640.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | $642.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.4M | $643.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $643.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.4M | $511.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | $512.8M |
| Q4 25 | $32.6M | $609.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.1M | $597.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.7M | $532.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $534.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.9M | $512.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $61.3M | $502.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.0M | $508.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $56.3M | $510.8M |
| Q4 25 | $495.4M | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $524.4M | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $537.2M | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.2M | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $530.9M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.4M | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $560.8M | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $565.8M | $1.7B |
| Q4 25 | 3.61× | 1.10× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.98× | 1.12× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.85× | 1.20× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | 1.20× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.98× | 1.26× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.89× | 1.28× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.06× | 1.00× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | 1.00× |
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 | $21.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-64.0K | $-36.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.1% | -22.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 35.7% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.13× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.1M | $-53.8M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.7M | $21.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3M | $15.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.3M | $42.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $52.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.5M | $23.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4M | $26.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | $49.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $26.6M |
| Q4 25 | $-64.0K | $-36.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $-39.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.8M | $2.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | $19.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | $-32.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.4M | $-31.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $13.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7M | $6.4M |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | -22.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | -38.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.5% | 1.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.5% | 11.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | -25.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.1% | -33.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.5% | 13.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | 3.6% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 35.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.9% | 54.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 39.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 19.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | 43.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 61.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 38.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 11.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.13× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 10.55× | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.62× | 1.89× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | 1.49× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.64× | 11.60× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.98× |
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% |
UTL
Segment breakdown not available.
