vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp (BAH) and Celanese Corp (CE). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.6B vs $2.2B, roughly 1.2× Celanese Corp). Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp runs the higher net margin — 7.6% vs 0.6%, a 7.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Celanese Corp posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-7.0% vs -10.2%). Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp produced more free cash flow last quarter ($248.0M vs $168.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp's revenue compounded faster (-2.8% CAGR vs -8.1%).
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.
Celanese Corporation, formerly known as Hoechst Celanese, is an American technology and specialty materials company headquartered in Irving, Texas. It is a Fortune 500 corporation. The company is the world's leading producer of acetic acid, producing about 1.95 million tonnes per year, representing approximately 20% of global production. Celanese is also the world's largest producer of vinyl acetate monomer (VAM).
BAH vs CE — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.6B | $2.2B |
| Net Profit | $200.0M | $14.0M |
| Gross Margin | 51.9% | 19.1% |
| Operating Margin | 8.8% | 4.0% |
| Net Margin | 7.6% | 0.6% |
| Revenue YoY | -10.2% | -7.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 7.0% | 100.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.63 | $0.13 |
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 | $2.6B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9B | $2.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.0B | $2.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.9B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.1B | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.9B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.8B | $2.6B |
| Q4 25 | $200.0M | $14.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $175.0M | $-1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $271.0M | $199.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $192.7M | $-21.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $186.9M | $-1.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $390.1M | $116.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $165.2M | $155.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $128.0M | $121.0M |
| Q4 25 | 51.9% | 19.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 53.6% | 21.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 51.3% | 21.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 53.6% | 19.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 55.2% | 22.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 56.7% | 23.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 53.4% | 24.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 54.7% | 21.2% |
| Q4 25 | 8.8% | 4.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.8% | -52.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.8% | 9.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.2% | 7.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.0% | -59.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.4% | 9.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.7% | 9.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 9.5% | 8.0% |
| Q4 25 | 7.6% | 0.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.1% | -56.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | 7.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | -0.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.4% | -80.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.4% | 4.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.6% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.6% | 4.6% |
| Q4 25 | $1.63 | $0.13 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.42 | $-12.39 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.16 | $1.81 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.52 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.45 | $-17.50 | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.01 | $1.06 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.27 | $1.41 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.97 | $1.10 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $882.0M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.9B | $11.4B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.0B | $4.0B |
| Total Assets | $7.1B | $21.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.84× | 2.81× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $882.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $816.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $711.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $885.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $453.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $558.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $297.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $554.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | $3.9B | $11.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.0B | $11.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.0B | $12.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0B | $12.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.4B | $11.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4B | $11.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.4B | $11.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.4B | $11.0B |
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $4.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $996.0M | $4.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $5.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $5.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $5.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $7.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $7.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.0B | $7.1B |
| Q4 25 | $7.1B | $21.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.2B | $22.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.2B | $23.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.3B | $23.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.8B | $22.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.9B | $25.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.6B | $25.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.6B | $26.0B |
| Q4 25 | 3.84× | 2.81× | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.98× | 2.95× | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.74× | 2.41× | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.99× | 2.39× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.79× | 2.14× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.83× | 1.56× | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.14× | 1.54× | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.26× | 1.56× |
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 | $261.0M | $252.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $248.0M | $168.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 9.5% | 7.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.5% | 3.8% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.30× | 18.00× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $933.4M | $803.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $261.0M | $252.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $421.0M | $447.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $119.0M | $410.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $219.0M | $37.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $150.8M | $494.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $587.1M | $79.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $52.1M | $292.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $143.8M | $101.0M |
| Q4 25 | $248.0M | $168.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $395.0M | $383.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $96.0M | $317.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $194.4M | $-65.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $133.6M | $389.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $563.3M | $-9.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.7M | $187.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $127.6M | $-36.0M |
| Q4 25 | 9.5% | 7.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.7% | 15.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.3% | 12.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | -2.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.6% | 16.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.9% | -0.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.7% | 7.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.6% | -1.4% |
| Q4 25 | 0.5% | 3.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.9% | 2.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | 3.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.8% | 4.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.6% | 4.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.8% | 3.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.1% | 4.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.6% | 5.2% |
| Q4 25 | 1.30× | 18.00× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.41× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.44× | 2.06× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.14× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.81× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.50× | 0.68× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.32× | 1.88× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.12× | 0.83× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BAH
| Defense Clients | $1.5B | 55% |
| Civil Clients | $732.0M | 28% |
| Intelligence Clients | $434.0M | 17% |
CE
| Engineered Materials | $1.3B | 58% |
| Acetyl Chain | $940.0M | 43% |
