vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Alexandria Real Estate Equities (ARE) and SENSIENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP (SXT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Alexandria Real Estate Equities is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($671.0M vs $435.8M, roughly 1.5× SENSIENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP). Alexandria Real Estate Equities runs the higher net margin — 59.4% vs 10.1%, a 49.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, SENSIENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (11.1% vs -11.5%). Over the past eight quarters, SENSIENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP's revenue compounded faster (3.9% CAGR vs -6.4%).
Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. (NYSE:ARE), an S&P 500® urban office real estate investment trust (REIT), is the first, longest-tenured, and pioneering owner, operator, and developer uniquely focused on collaborative life science, technology, and agtech campuses in AAA innovation cluster locations, with a total market capitalization of $31.9 billion as of December 31, 2020, and an asset base in North America of 49.7 million square feet (SF). The asset base in North America includes 31.9...
Sensient Technologies is a global manufacturer and marketer of colors, flavors and fragrances based in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Their products are used in many foods and beverages, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, home and personal care products, specialty printing and imaging products, computer imaging and industrial colors. Sensient reported revenue of $1,468 million in 2013. Subdivisions include the Sensient Flavors & Fragrances Group and the Sensient Color Group. Within the Flavors & Fragrances G...
ARE vs SXT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $671.0M | $435.8M |
| Net Profit | $398.4M | $44.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 15.3% |
| Net Margin | 59.4% | 10.1% |
| Revenue YoY | -11.5% | 11.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 740.6% | 28.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $2.10 | $1.04 |
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 | $671.0M | $435.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $754.4M | $393.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $751.9M | $412.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $762.0M | $414.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $758.2M | $392.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $788.9M | $376.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $791.6M | $392.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $766.7M | $403.5M |
| Q1 26 | $398.4M | $44.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-1.1B | $25.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-232.8M | $37.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-107.0M | $37.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-8.9M | $34.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-62.2M | $30.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $167.9M | $32.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $46.7M | $30.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 31.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 34.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 34.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 33.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 31.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 33.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 32.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | 15.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 9.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 14.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 13.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 13.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 11.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 12.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 12.3% |
| Q1 26 | 59.4% | 10.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | -143.3% | 6.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -31.0% | 9.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -14.0% | 9.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.2% | 8.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -7.9% | 8.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 21.2% | 8.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.1% | 7.7% |
| Q1 26 | $2.10 | $1.04 | ||
| Q4 25 | $-6.35 | $0.60 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.38 | $0.87 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.64 | $0.88 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.07 | $0.81 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.38 | $0.71 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.96 | $0.77 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.25 | $0.73 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $418.7M | $38.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $767.8M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $19.4B | $1.2B |
| Total Assets | $34.2B | $2.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.63× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $418.7M | $38.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | $549.1M | $36.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $579.5M | $42.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $520.5M | $56.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $476.4M | $32.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $552.1M | $26.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $562.6M | $37.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $561.0M | $30.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | $767.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $12.4B | $709.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.6B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.3B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.1B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.2B | $613.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.7B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.4B | — |
| Q1 26 | $19.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 25 | $15.5B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.6B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.5B | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.9B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.2B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.3B | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | $34.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $34.1B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $37.4B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $37.6B | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $37.6B | $2.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $37.5B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $38.5B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $37.8B | $2.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.63× | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.80× | 0.59× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.82× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.77× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.75× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.68× | 0.58× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.70× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.68× | — |
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 | $475.0M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 76.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.19× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $475.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $312.4M | $44.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $433.5M | $44.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $460.2M | $48.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $207.9M | $-9.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $274.2M | $21.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $477.4M | $76.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $411.8M | $43.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $12.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $24.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $27.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-25.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-1.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $63.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $32.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 5.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 6.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -6.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -0.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 16.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 7.9% |
| Q1 26 | 76.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 8.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 5.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 6.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.9% |
| Q1 26 | 1.19× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.75× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.19× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.28× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -0.26× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.71× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.84× | 2.35× | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.82× | 1.42× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ARE
| Same properties | $431.4M | 64% |
| Tenant recoveries | $178.2M | 27% |
| Non-same properties | $43.3M | 6% |
| Other | $18.0M | 3% |
SXT
Segment breakdown not available.
