vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Axalta Coating Systems Ltd. (AXTA) and Mohawk Industries (MHK). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Axalta Coating Systems Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($5.1B vs $2.7B, roughly 1.9× Mohawk Industries). Mohawk Industries runs the higher net margin — 4.3% vs 1.8%, a 2.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Mohawk Industries posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (8.0% vs -0.6%). Axalta Coating Systems Ltd. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($21.0M vs $7.8M). Over the past eight quarters, Axalta Coating Systems Ltd.'s revenue compounded faster (94.5% CAGR vs -1.3%).
Axalta Coating Systems Ltd., also known as simply Axalta, is an American company specializing in coatings in a wide variety of industrial applications, materials and sectors, including automotive paints. The company is based in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and incorporated in Bermuda. Axalta develops and manufactures coatings for light and commercial vehicles, industrial, and refinish applications. The firm does business in 130 countries, has nearly 13,000 employees, and has more than 100,000 ...
Mohawk Industries is an American flooring manufacturer based in Calhoun, Georgia. Mohawk produces floor covering products for residential and commercial applications in North America and residential applications in Europe. The company manufacturing portfolio consists of soft flooring products, hard flooring products, laminate flooring, sheet vinyl and luxury vinyl tile, natural stone and quartz countertops. In Europe, the company also produces and sells insulation, panels and mezzanine flooring.
AXTA vs MHK — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $5.1B | $2.7B |
| Net Profit | $91.0M | $117.1M |
| Gross Margin | 83.6% | 23.5% |
| Operating Margin | 2.9% | 4.1% |
| Net Margin | 1.8% | 4.3% |
| Revenue YoY | -0.6% | 8.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -9.1% | 61.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.42 | $1.90 |
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 | $5.1B | $2.7B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | $2.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $2.8B |
| Q1 26 | $91.0M | $117.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $60.0M | $42.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $110.0M | $108.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $109.0M | $146.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.0M | $72.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $137.0M | $93.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $101.0M | $162.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $112.0M | $157.4M |
| Q1 26 | 83.6% | 23.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 33.4% | 23.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.9% | 23.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 35.0% | 25.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 34.3% | 23.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.1% | 23.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 35.0% | 25.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.0% | 25.8% |
| Q1 26 | 2.9% | 4.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | 12.8% | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.8% | 5.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.8% | 6.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.9% | 3.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.3% | 4.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.6% | 7.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.2% | 7.6% |
| Q1 26 | 1.8% | 4.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.8% | 1.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.5% | 3.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.4% | 5.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.8% | 2.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.5% | 3.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.7% | 6.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.3% | 5.6% |
| Q1 26 | $0.42 | $1.90 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.28 | $0.69 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.51 | $1.75 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.50 | $2.34 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.45 | $1.15 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.63 | $1.49 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.46 | $2.55 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.51 | $2.46 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $608.0M | $872.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.1B | $1.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.5B | $8.4B |
| Total Assets | $7.6B | $13.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.27× | 0.21× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $608.0M | $872.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $657.0M | $856.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $606.0M | $516.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $625.0M | $546.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $575.0M | $702.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $593.0M | $666.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $567.0M | $424.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $840.0M | $497.4M |
| Q1 26 | $3.1B | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.2B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.4B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.5B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.6B | — |
| Q1 26 | $2.5B | $8.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.3B | $8.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.3B | $8.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.3B | $8.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.1B | $7.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | $7.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $7.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8B | $7.6B |
| Q1 26 | $7.6B | $13.8B | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.6B | $13.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.8B | $13.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.8B | $13.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.4B | $13.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.2B | $12.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.5B | $13.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.3B | $13.3B |
| Q1 26 | 1.27× | 0.21× | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.36× | 0.24× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.48× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.50× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.64× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.78× | 0.30× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.84× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.02× | — |
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 | — | $110.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $21.0M | $7.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 0.4% | 0.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 3.7% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 0.94× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $491.0M | $709.4M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $110.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $344.0M | $459.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $137.0M | $386.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $142.0M | $206.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $26.0M | $3.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $234.0M | $397.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $194.0M | $319.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $114.0M | $233.6M |
| Q1 26 | $21.0M | $7.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $286.0M | $265.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $87.0M | $310.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $97.0M | $126.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-17.0M | $-85.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $172.0M | $236.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $161.0M | $204.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $91.0M | $142.2M |
| Q1 26 | 0.4% | 0.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 22.7% | 9.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.8% | 11.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.4% | 4.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.3% | -3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.1% | 9.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.2% | 7.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.7% | 5.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | 3.7% | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.6% | 7.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.9% | 2.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.4% | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.4% | 3.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.7% | 6.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.5% | 4.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.7% | 3.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.94× | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.73× | 10.94× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.25× | 3.55× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.30× | 1.41× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.26× | 0.05× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.71× | 4.26× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.92× | 1.97× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.02× | 1.48× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AXTA
Segment breakdown not available.
MHK
| Global Ceramic | $1.1B | 40% |
| Flooring NA | $880.0M | 32% |
| Flooring ROW | $751.3M | 28% |
