vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Baker Hughes (BKR) and Solaris Energy Infrastructure, Inc. (SEI). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Baker Hughes is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($6.6B vs $179.7M, roughly 36.7× Solaris Energy Infrastructure, Inc.). Baker Hughes runs the higher net margin — 14.1% vs -0.9%, a 15.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Solaris Energy Infrastructure, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (86.6% vs 2.5%). Baker Hughes produced more free cash flow last quarter ($210.0M vs $-158.6M). Over the past eight quarters, Solaris Energy Infrastructure, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (62.7% CAGR vs -3.9%).
Baker Hughes Company is an American global energy technology company co-headquartered in Houston, Texas and London, UK. As one of the world's largest oil field services, industrial and energy technology companies, it provides products and services to the oil and gas industry for exploration and production, as well as other energy and industrial applications. It operates in over 120 countries, with facilities in Australia, Brazil, Singapore, Malaysia, India, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Italy, Germany, ...
AGL Energy Ltd is an Australian listed public company involved in both the generation and retailing of electricity and gas for residential and commercial use. It is one of the "big three" retailers in the National Electricity Market. AGL is Australia's largest electricity generator, and the nation's largest carbon emitter.
BKR vs SEI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 2026 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $6.6B | $179.7M |
| Net Profit | $930.0M | $-1.7M |
| Gross Margin | 22.8% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 22.2% |
| Net Margin | 14.1% | -0.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 2.5% | 86.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | 131.3% | -126.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.93 | — |
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 | $6.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.4B | $179.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.0B | $166.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.9B | $149.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.4B | $126.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.4B | $96.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.9B | $75.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.1B | $73.9M |
| Q1 26 | $930.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $876.0M | $-1.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $609.0M | $14.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $701.0M | $12.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $402.0M | $5.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $6.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $766.0M | $-968.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $579.0M | $6.2M |
| Q1 26 | 22.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.1% | 22.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.7% | 22.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.0% | 23.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.7% | 17.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.0% | 26.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.5% | 7.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.7% | 16.0% |
| Q1 26 | 14.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 11.9% | -0.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.7% | 8.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.1% | 8.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.3% | 4.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.0% | 6.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.1% | -1.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.1% | 8.4% |
| Q1 26 | $0.93 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $14.8B | $353.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $16.2B | $184.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $19.5B | $564.3M |
| Total Assets | $50.9B | $2.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.83× | 0.33× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $14.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $353.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $106.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $99.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $16.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $114.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $18.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $5.1M |
| Q1 26 | $16.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.4B | $184.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.0B | $382.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.0B | $386.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.0B | $316.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.0B | $315.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.0B | $315.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.9B | — |
| Q1 26 | $19.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $18.8B | $564.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.2B | $546.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.7B | $399.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.0B | $361.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.9B | $355.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $16.2B | $221.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.6B | $204.6M |
| Q1 26 | $50.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $40.9B | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $39.2B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.7B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $38.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $38.4B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $37.5B | $939.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $36.7B | $457.8M |
| Q1 26 | 0.83× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.29× | 0.33× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.33× | 0.70× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.34× | 0.97× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.35× | 0.88× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.35× | 0.89× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.37× | 1.42× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.38× | — |
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 | — | $95.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $210.0M | $-158.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 3.2% | -88.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 4.4% | 141.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $2.3B | $-437.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | $95.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $929.0M | $63.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $510.0M | $24.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $709.0M | $25.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $13.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | $10.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $348.0M | $18.9M |
| Q1 26 | $210.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $-158.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $634.0M | $462.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $209.0M | $-160.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $409.0M | $-118.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $837.0M | $-113.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $710.0M | $-47.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $56.0M | $18.2M |
| Q1 26 | 3.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.4% | -88.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.0% | 0.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.0% | -107.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.4% | -93.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 11.4% | -117.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.3% | -63.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.8% | 24.7% |
| Q1 26 | 4.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.1% | 141.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.2% | 37.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.4% | 124.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.7% | 114.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.8% | 131.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.3% | 77.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.1% | 0.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.90× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.53× | 4.35× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.73× | 2.02× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.76× | 4.83× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.01× | 2.10× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.32× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.60× | 3.04× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BKR
Segment breakdown not available.
SEI
| Solaris Power Solutions | $103.7M | 58% |
| Solaris Logistics Solutions | $76.1M | 42% |
