vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Apollo Global Management (APO) and Synchrony Financial (SYF), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Apollo Global Management is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($9.9B vs $4.8B, roughly 2.1× Synchrony Financial). Synchrony Financial runs the higher net margin — 6.9% vs 15.8%, a 8.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Apollo Global Management posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (86.7% vs 3.7%). Over the past eight quarters, Apollo Global Management's revenue compounded faster (18.4% CAGR vs 4.0%).
Apollo Global Management, Inc. is an American asset management firm that primarily invests in alternative assets. As of 2025, the company had $840 billion of assets under management, including $392 billion invested in credit, including mezzanine capital, hedge funds, non-performing loans, and collateralized loan obligations, $99 billion invested in private equity, and $46.2 billion invested in real assets, which includes real estate and infrastructure. The company invests money on behalf of p...
Synchrony Financial is an American consumer financial services company with its headquarters in Stamford, Connecticut, United States. The company offers consumer financing products, including credit, promotional financing and loyalty programs, installment lending to industries and consumers through Synchrony Bank, its wholly owned online bank subsidiary.
APO vs SYF — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $9.9B | $4.8B |
| Net Profit | $684.0M | $751.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 17.8% | 20.0% |
| Net Margin | 6.9% | 15.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 86.7% | 3.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | -54.0% | -3.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.09 | $2.03 |
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 | $9.9B | $4.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.8B | $4.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.8B | $4.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.5B | $4.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.3B | $4.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.8B | $4.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.0B | $4.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.0B | $4.4B |
| Q4 25 | $684.0M | $751.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $630.0M | $967.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $442.0M | $757.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5B | $774.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $811.0M | $789.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $853.0M | $643.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | 17.8% | 20.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.5% | 30.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.4% | 27.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.3% | 22.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 32.6% | 21.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.8% | 22.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.9% | 19.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 31.1% | 38.8% |
| Q4 25 | 6.9% | 15.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.7% | 22.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.2% | 21.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.0% | 17.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 28.1% | 16.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.4% | 17.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.2% | 14.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 20.3% | 29.4% |
| Q4 25 | $1.09 | $2.03 | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.78 | $2.86 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.99 | $2.50 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.68 | $1.89 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.41 | $1.92 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.29 | $1.94 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.35 | $1.55 | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.28 | $3.14 |
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 | — | $15.0B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $13.4B | $15.2B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $23.3B | $16.8B |
| Total Assets | $460.9B | $119.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.57× | 0.91× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | $15.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $16.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $19.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $21.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $14.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $17.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $18.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $20.0B |
| Q4 25 | $13.4B | $15.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.6B | $14.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.1B | $16.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.6B | $17.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.6B | $15.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.8B | $15.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.8B | $15.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.6B | $16.1B |
| Q4 25 | $23.3B | $16.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $23.1B | $17.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $19.3B | $17.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $18.0B | $16.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.3B | $16.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.9B | $16.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.3B | $15.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $14.8B | $15.3B |
| Q4 25 | $460.9B | $119.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $449.5B | $117.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $419.6B | $120.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $395.0B | $122.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $377.9B | $119.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $368.7B | $119.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $346.5B | $120.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $334.1B | $121.2B |
| Q4 25 | 0.57× | 0.91× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.55× | 0.85× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.63× | 0.94× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.59× | 1.03× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.61× | 0.93× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.55× | 0.98× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.64× | 1.01× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.65× | 1.06× |
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 | $4.7B | $2.5B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 6.83× | 3.27× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $4.7B | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $303.0M | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $-4.0M | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $2.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $70.0M | $2.2B |
| Q4 25 | 6.83× | 3.27× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.17× | 2.45× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.00× | 2.65× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.29× | 2.91× | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.00× | 3.04× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.29× | 3.50× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.56× | 3.86× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.05× | 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
APO
| Retirement Services Segment | $8.5B | 86% |
| Asset Management1 | $681.0M | 7% |
| Principal Investing Segment | $624.0M | 6% |
| Management Service Incentive | $96.0M | 1% |
SYF
Segment breakdown not available.
