vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Aramark (ARMK) and Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp (BAH). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Aramark is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.8B vs $2.6B, roughly 1.8× Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp). Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp runs the higher net margin — 7.6% vs 2.0%, a 5.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Aramark posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (6.1% vs -10.2%). Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp produced more free cash flow last quarter ($248.0M vs $-904.4M). Over the past eight quarters, Aramark's revenue compounded faster (7.3% CAGR vs -2.8%).
Aramark is an American food service and facilities services provider to clients in areas including education, prisons, healthcare, business, and leisure. It operates in North America and an additional 14 countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Chile, Ireland, and Spain.
Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation is the parent of Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., an American company specializing in digital transformation and artificial intelligence. The company is headquartered in McLean, Virginia, in the Washington metropolitan area, with 80 additional offices around the globe. Booz Allen's stated core business is to provide consulting, analysis, and engineering services to public- and private-sector organizations and nonprofits.
ARMK vs BAH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.8B | $2.6B |
| Net Profit | $96.2M | $200.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | 51.9% |
| Operating Margin | 4.5% | 8.8% |
| Net Margin | 2.0% | 7.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 6.1% | -10.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -9.0% | 7.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.36 | $1.63 |
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 | $4.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.0B | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.6B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.3B | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.6B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.4B | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.4B | $2.9B |
| Q1 26 | $96.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $87.1M | $200.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $175.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $71.8M | $271.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $61.9M | $192.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $105.6M | $186.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $122.4M | $390.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.1M | $165.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 51.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 53.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 51.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 53.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 55.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 56.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 53.4% |
| Q1 26 | 4.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.3% | 8.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 9.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.9% | 8.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.1% | 9.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.8% | 10.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.0% | 17.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.7% | 8.7% |
| Q1 26 | 2.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.7% | 7.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.6% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.4% | 6.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.3% | 6.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.8% | 12.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.3% | 5.6% |
| Q1 26 | $0.36 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.33 | $1.63 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.42 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.27 | $2.16 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.23 | $1.52 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.39 | $1.45 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.46 | $3.01 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.22 | $1.27 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $439.6M | $882.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $6.2B | $3.9B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.2B | $1.0B |
| Total Assets | $13.5B | $7.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.94× | 3.84× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $439.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $639.1M | $882.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $816.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $501.5M | $711.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $920.5M | $885.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $484.1M | $453.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $672.5M | $558.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $436.1M | $297.7M |
| Q1 26 | $6.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.4B | $3.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $4.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.3B | $4.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.1B | $4.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.0B | $3.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.3B | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.0B | $3.4B |
| Q1 26 | $3.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.1B | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $996.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.0B | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.0B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.9B | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | $13.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $13.3B | $7.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $7.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.3B | $7.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.5B | $7.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.7B | $6.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.7B | $6.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.5B | $6.6B |
| Q1 26 | 1.94× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.71× | 3.84× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.98× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.03× | 3.74× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.02× | 3.99× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.61× | 2.79× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.42× | 2.83× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.71× | 3.14× |
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 | $-782.2M | $261.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-904.4M | $248.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -18.7% | 9.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.5% | 0.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -8.13× | 1.30× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $933.4M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $-782.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $261.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $421.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $76.7M | $119.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $255.9M | $219.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-587.2M | $150.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | $587.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $140.7M | $52.1M |
| Q1 26 | $-904.4M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $248.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $395.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-34.7M | $96.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $140.1M | $194.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-707.0M | $133.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $882.3M | $563.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $55.6M | $19.7M |
| Q1 26 | -18.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 9.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 13.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.8% | 3.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.3% | 6.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -15.5% | 4.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.0% | 17.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.3% | 0.7% |
| Q1 26 | 2.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.8% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.4% | 0.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.7% | 0.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.6% | 0.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 0.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | 1.1% |
| Q1 26 | -8.13× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.30× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.41× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.07× | 0.44× | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.14× | 1.14× | ||
| Q4 24 | -5.56× | 0.81× | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.35× | 1.50× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.42× | 0.32× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ARMK
| Education | $1.1B | 22% |
| Sports Leisure Corrections | $961.2M | 20% |
| Food And Support Services International | $847.8M | 18% |
| Other | $621.6M | 13% |
| Businessand Industry | $510.6M | 11% |
| Health Care | $421.3M | 9% |
| Facility Services | $382.9M | 8% |
BAH
| Defense Clients | $1.5B | 55% |
| Civil Clients | $732.0M | 28% |
| Intelligence Clients | $434.0M | 17% |
