vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp (BAH) and EPAM Systems (EPAM). 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 $1.4B, roughly 1.9× EPAM Systems). EPAM Systems runs the higher net margin — 7.8% vs 7.6%, a 0.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, EPAM Systems posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (12.8% vs -10.2%). EPAM Systems produced more free cash flow last quarter ($268.1M vs $248.0M). Over the past eight quarters, EPAM Systems's revenue compounded faster (9.9% CAGR vs -2.8%).
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.
EPAM Systems, Inc. is an American company that specializes in software engineering services, digital platform engineering, and digital product design, operating out of Newtown, Pennsylvania. EPAM is a founding member of the MACH Alliance.
BAH vs EPAM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.6B | $1.4B |
| Net Profit | $200.0M | $109.4M |
| Gross Margin | 51.9% | 30.1% |
| Operating Margin | 8.8% | 10.6% |
| Net Margin | 7.6% | 7.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -10.2% | 12.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 7.0% | 5.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.63 | $1.97 |
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 | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.0B | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.9B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.9B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.8B | $1.2B |
| Q4 25 | $200.0M | $109.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $175.0M | $106.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $271.0M | $88.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $192.7M | $73.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $186.9M | $103.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $390.1M | $136.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $165.2M | $98.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $128.0M | $116.2M |
| Q4 25 | 51.9% | 30.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 53.6% | 29.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 51.3% | 28.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 53.6% | 26.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 55.2% | 30.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 56.7% | 34.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 53.4% | 29.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 54.7% | 28.4% |
| Q4 25 | 8.8% | 10.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.8% | 10.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.8% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.2% | 7.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.0% | 10.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.4% | 15.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.7% | 10.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 9.5% | 9.5% |
| Q4 25 | 7.6% | 7.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.1% | 7.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | 6.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | 5.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.4% | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.4% | 11.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.6% | 8.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.6% | 10.0% |
| Q4 25 | $1.63 | $1.97 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.42 | $1.91 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.16 | $1.56 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.52 | $1.28 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.45 | $1.80 | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.01 | $2.37 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.27 | $1.70 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.97 | $1.97 |
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 | $1.3B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.9B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.0B | $3.7B |
| Total Assets | $7.1B | $4.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.84× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $882.0M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $816.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $711.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $885.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $453.5M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $558.7M | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $297.7M | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $554.3M | $2.0B |
| Q4 25 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.0B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.0B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.4B | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $996.0M | $3.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $3.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $3.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.0B | $3.5B |
| Q4 25 | $7.1B | $4.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.2B | $4.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.2B | $4.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.3B | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.8B | $4.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.9B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.6B | $4.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.6B | $4.4B |
| Q4 25 | 3.84× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.98× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.74× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.99× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.79× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.83× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.14× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.26× | — |
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 | $282.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $248.0M | $268.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 9.5% | 19.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.5% | 1.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.30× | 2.59× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $933.4M | $612.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $261.0M | $282.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $421.0M | $294.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $119.0M | $53.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $219.0M | $24.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $150.8M | $130.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $587.1M | $242.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $52.1M | $57.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $143.8M | $129.9M |
| Q4 25 | $248.0M | $268.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $395.0M | $286.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $96.0M | $43.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $194.4M | $14.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $133.6M | $114.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $563.3M | $237.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.7M | $52.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $127.6M | $123.2M |
| Q4 25 | 9.5% | 19.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.7% | 20.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.3% | 3.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | 1.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.6% | 9.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.9% | 20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.7% | 4.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.6% | 10.6% |
| Q4 25 | 0.5% | 1.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.9% | 0.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | 0.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.8% | 0.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.6% | 1.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.8% | 0.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.1% | 0.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.6% | 0.6% |
| Q4 25 | 1.30× | 2.59× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.41× | 2.76× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.44× | 0.60× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.14× | 0.33× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.81× | 1.26× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.50× | 1.77× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.32× | 0.58× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.12× | 1.12× |
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% |
EPAM
Segment breakdown not available.
