vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Amphenol (APH) and Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P. (BIP). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Amphenol is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($7.6B vs $5.4B, roughly 1.4× Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P.). Amphenol runs the higher net margin — 12.4% vs 4.6%, a 7.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Amphenol posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (58.4% vs 5.7%).
Amphenol Corporation is an American producer of electronic and fiber optic connectors, cable and interconnect systems such as coaxial cables. Amphenol is a portmanteau from the corporation's original name, American Phenolic Corp.
Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P. is a publicly traded limited partnership with corporate headquarters in Toronto, Canada, that engages in the acquisition and management of infrastructure assets on a global basis.
APH vs BIP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $7.6B | $5.4B |
| Net Profit | $943.3M | $252.0M |
| Gross Margin | 36.7% | 26.4% |
| Operating Margin | 24.0% | 24.4% |
| Net Margin | 12.4% | 4.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 58.4% | 5.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 26.8% | 37.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.72 | $-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.
| Q1 26 | $7.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.4B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.7B | $5.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.8B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.0B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.6B | $5.1B |
| Q1 26 | $943.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $252.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $737.8M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $746.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $604.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $524.8M | $184.0M |
| Q1 26 | 36.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 38.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 38.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 36.3% | 26.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 34.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 33.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 33.6% | 24.6% |
| Q1 26 | 24.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 26.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 27.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 25.1% | 24.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.4% | 22.8% |
| Q1 26 | 12.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 18.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.3% | 4.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 15.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.5% | 3.6% |
| Q1 26 | $0.72 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.93 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.97 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.86 | $-0.03 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.58 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.48 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.41 | $-0.10 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $4.6B | $2.3B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $18.7B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $14.1B | $29.6B |
| Total Assets | $42.1B | $108.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.33× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $4.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $11.4B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $1.3B |
| Q1 26 | $18.7B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $14.6B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.1B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.8B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.5B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.1B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.0B | — |
| Q1 26 | $14.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $13.4B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.5B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $11.5B | $29.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.3B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.8B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.5B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.0B | $30.1B |
| Q1 26 | $42.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $36.2B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $27.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $25.7B | $108.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $22.9B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $21.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $19.6B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.6B | $100.9B |
| Q1 26 | 1.33× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.09× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.57× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.62× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.66× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.66× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.54× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.56× | — |
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 | $1.1B | $1.2B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $831.2M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 10.9% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.8% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.19× | 4.72× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $4.6B | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $764.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $847.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $704.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $664.1M | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | $831.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $576.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $647.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $474.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $522.8M | — |
| Q1 26 | 10.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 22.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.5% | — |
| Q1 26 | 3.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | 1.19× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.44× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.18× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.30× | 4.72× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.04× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.14× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.16× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.27× | 5.74× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
APH
| Communications Solutions | $4.5B | 60% |
| Harsh Environment Solutions | $1.7B | 22% |
| Interconnect and Sensor Systems | $1.4B | 18% |
BIP
Segment breakdown not available.
