vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Amer Sports, Inc. (AS) and Pure Storage, Inc. (PSTG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Amer Sports, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.1B vs $964.5M, roughly 1.1× Pure Storage, Inc.). Pure Storage, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 5.7% vs 1.8%, a 3.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. Amer Sports, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($92.2M vs $52.6M).
Amer Sports, Inc. is a Finnish multinational sporting equipment division based in Helsinki, Finland. Established in 1950 as an industrial conglomerate with interests as diverse as tobacco trading, ship owning and publishing, Amer has gradually evolved into a multinational firm devoted to the production and marketing of sporting goods. The company employs over 9,700 people. Since 2018, Amer has been a subsidiary of Chinese retail conglomerate Anta Sports.
Pure Storage, Inc. is an American publicly traded technology company headquartered in Santa Clara, California, United States. It develops all-flash data storage hardware and software products. Pure Storage was founded in 2009 and developed its products in stealth mode until 2011. Afterwards, the company grew in revenues by about 50% per quarter and raised more than $470 million in venture capital funding, before going public in 2015. Initially, Pure Storage developed the software for storage ...
AS vs PSTG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2024 vs Q3 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.1B | $964.5M |
| Net Profit | $19.0M | $54.8M |
| Gross Margin | 52.8% | 72.3% |
| Operating Margin | 12.4% | 5.6% |
| Net Margin | 1.8% | 5.7% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 16.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -13.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.05 | $0.16 |
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.
| Q4 25 | — | $964.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $861.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $778.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $879.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $831.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $763.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $693.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | $789.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $54.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $47.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-14.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $42.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $63.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $35.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-35.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $19.0M | $65.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | 72.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 70.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 68.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 67.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 70.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 70.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 71.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 52.8% | 72.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -4.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -6.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 12.4% | 7.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 5.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -1.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 4.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -5.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.8% | 8.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.16 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.14 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.13 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.19 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.11 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.05 | $0.22 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $852.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $1.4B |
| Total Assets | — | $4.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $852.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $887.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $739.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $723.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $894.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $965.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $900.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $702.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | — | $4.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $4.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $3.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $3.7B |
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 | $114.3M | $116.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $92.2M | $52.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 8.8% | 5.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.1% | 6.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 6.02× | 2.12× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $566.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $116.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $212.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $283.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $208.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $97.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $226.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $221.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $114.3M | $244.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | $52.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $150.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $211.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $152.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $35.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $166.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $172.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $92.2M | $200.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 17.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 27.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 17.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 4.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 21.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 24.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.8% | 25.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 6.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 7.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 6.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 7.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.1% | 5.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.12× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.50× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.91× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.52× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 6.35× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 6.02× | 3.74× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AS
| Americas2 | $409.6M | 39% |
| EMEA1 | $356.9M | 34% |
| Greater China3 | $205.6M | 20% |
| Asia Pacific4 | $78.2M | 7% |
PSTG
| US | $683.2M | 71% |
| Non Us | $281.3M | 29% |
