vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P. (BEP) and CONSTELLIUM SE (CSTM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
CONSTELLIUM SE is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.2B vs $1.7B, roughly 1.3× Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P.). Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P. runs the higher net margin — 5.9% vs 5.1%, a 0.8% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P.BEPEarnings & Financial Report
Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P. is a publicly traded limited partnership that owns and operates renewable power assets, with corporate headquarters in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. It is 60% owned by Brookfield Asset Management.
Constellium SE is an American-Swiss, French-based global manufacturer of aluminium rolled products, extruded products, and structural parts based on a large variety of advanced alloys. Constellium's C-TEC research center has been credited for advancing technology in the field of advanced aluminium alloy. Constellium primarily serves the aerospace, automotive, and packaging sectors. Large clients include Mercedes-Benz, Audi, BMW, Fiat Chrysler Automotive, Ford, Airbus, Boeing, and Bombardier.
BEP vs CSTM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.7B | $2.2B |
| Net Profit | $100.0M | $112.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 7.5% |
| Net Margin | 5.9% | 5.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 14.2% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 213.6% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.22 | $0.79 |
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 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 23 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $1.3B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $112.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $88.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $100.0M | $36.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $37.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-88.0M | $76.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $151.0M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $122.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 7.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 5.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 5.4% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.9% | 1.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -5.9% | 3.9% | ||
| Q2 23 | 12.5% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 9.6% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.79 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.62 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.22 | $0.25 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.26 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.28 | $0.51 | ||
| Q2 23 | $-0.10 | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-0.03 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.9B | $120.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $1.9B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $33.3B | $952.0M |
| Total Assets | $98.6B | $5.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 2.00× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $120.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $122.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $133.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $118.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $1.1B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $952.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $845.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $33.3B | $780.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $745.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $28.0B | $796.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $28.5B | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $23.0B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $5.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $5.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $98.6B | $5.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $5.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $73.8B | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $65.9B | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $57.0B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.00× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.34× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.53× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.56× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
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 | $379.0M | $218.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $109.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 5.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 5.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 3.79× | 1.95× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $159.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $218.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $99.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $379.0M | $114.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $58.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $231.0M | $138.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $382.0M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $438.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $109.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $24.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $37.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-11.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $54.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -0.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.8% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.3% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.95× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.13× | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.79× | 3.17× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.57× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.82× | ||
| Q2 23 | 2.53× | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 3.59× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BEP
Segment breakdown not available.
CSTM
| Packaging Rolled Products | $1.0B | 46% |
| Automotive Rolled Products | $318.0M | 14% |
| Aerospace Rolled Products | $270.0M | 12% |
| Transportation Industry Defense And Other Rolled Products | $232.0M | 11% |
| Automotive Extruded Products | $220.0M | 10% |
| Other Extruded Products | $132.0M | 6% |
| Specialty And Other Thin Rolled Products | $22.0M | 1% |
