vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Amphenol (APH) and Intuit (INTU), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Amphenol is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($6.4B vs $3.9B, roughly 1.7× Intuit). Amphenol runs the higher net margin — 18.6% vs 11.5%, a 7.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Amphenol posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (49.1% vs 18.3%). Amphenol produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.5B vs $599.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Amphenol's revenue compounded faster (40.6% CAGR vs 7.1%).
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.
Intuit Inc. is an American multinational business software company that specializes in financial software. Headquartered in Mountain View, California, the company is led by CEO Sasan Goodarzi. Intuit's products include the tax preparation application TurboTax, the small business accounting software QuickBooks, the credit monitoring and personal finance service Credit Karma, and the email marketing platform Mailchimp. As of 2019, more than 95% of its revenue and earnings originated from its op...
APH vs INTU — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q1 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $6.4B | $3.9B |
| Net Profit | $1.2B | $446.0M |
| Gross Margin | 38.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | 26.8% | 13.7% |
| Net Margin | 18.6% | 11.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 49.1% | 18.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 60.2% | 126.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.93 | $1.59 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $6.4B | $3.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.2B | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.7B | $7.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.8B | $4.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.3B | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.0B | $3.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.6B | $6.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.3B | $3.4B |
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $446.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $381.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $737.8M | $471.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $746.1M | $197.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $604.4M | $-20.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $524.8M | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $548.7M | $353.0M |
| Q4 25 | 38.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 38.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 36.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 34.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 33.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 33.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 33.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | 26.8% | 13.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 27.5% | 8.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 25.1% | 48.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.3% | 15.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.1% | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.3% | -4.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.4% | 46.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 21.0% | 10.9% |
| Q4 25 | 18.6% | 11.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.1% | 9.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.3% | 36.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 15.3% | 11.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.3% | 6.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.0% | -0.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.5% | 35.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 16.9% | 10.4% |
| Q4 25 | $0.93 | $1.59 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.97 | $1.28 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.86 | $10.02 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.58 | $1.67 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.16 | $0.70 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.48 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.41 | $8.42 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.87 | $1.25 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $11.4B | $3.5B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $14.6B | $6.1B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $13.4B | $19.3B |
| Total Assets | $36.2B | $33.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.09× | 0.32× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $11.4B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.9B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $5.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $2.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.3B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | $3.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $4.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.0B | $1.5B |
| Q4 25 | $14.6B | $6.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.1B | $6.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.1B | $6.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.8B | $6.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.5B | $6.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.1B | $6.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.0B | $6.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.6B | $6.0B |
| Q4 25 | $13.4B | $19.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.5B | $19.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $11.5B | $20.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.3B | $17.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.8B | $18.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.5B | $18.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.0B | $18.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.7B | $16.9B |
| Q4 25 | $36.2B | $33.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $27.1B | $37.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $25.7B | $36.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $22.9B | $31.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $21.4B | $33.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $19.6B | $32.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.6B | $31.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $16.7B | $29.7B |
| Q4 25 | 1.09× | 0.32× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.57× | 0.30× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.62× | 0.32× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.66× | 0.35× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.66× | 0.34× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.54× | 0.33× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.56× | 0.32× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.41× | 0.35× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $1.7B | $637.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.5B | $599.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 22.8% | 15.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 3.9% | 1.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.44× | 1.43× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $4.4B | $6.4B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | $637.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $381.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $4.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $764.9M | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $847.1M | $362.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $704.0M | $417.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $664.1M | $4.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $599.5M | $613.0M |
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $599.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $366.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $4.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $576.3M | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $647.3M | $329.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $474.0M | $400.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $522.8M | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $505.2M | $550.0M |
| Q4 25 | 22.8% | 15.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.6% | 9.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.8% | 56.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.0% | 26.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.0% | 10.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.7% | 12.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.5% | 57.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.5% | 16.2% |
| Q4 25 | 3.9% | 1.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.2% | 0.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.3% | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 0.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.6% | 1.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.7% | 0.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.9% | 0.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.9% | 1.9% |
| Q4 25 | 1.44× | 1.43× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.18× | 1.00× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.30× | 1.56× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.04× | 2.27× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.14× | 1.84× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.16× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.27× | 1.65× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.09× | 1.74× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
APH
| Communications Solutions Segment | $3.5B | 54% |
| Harsh Environment Solutions Segment | $1.7B | 26% |
| Sales Channel Through Intermediary | $1.4B | 21% |
INTU
| Quick Books Online Accounting | $1.2B | 32% |
| Product And Other | $779.0M | 20% |
| Credit Karma | $616.0M | 16% |
| Turbo Tax | $581.0M | 15% |
| Quick Books Desktop Accounting | $408.0M | 11% |
| Pro Tax | $290.0M | 7% |
