vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Baker Hughes (BKR) and Venture Global, Inc. (VG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Baker Hughes is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($6.6B vs $4.4B, roughly 1.5× Venture Global, Inc.). Venture Global, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 26.8% vs 14.1%, a 12.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Venture Global, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (191.7% vs -7.5%). Baker Hughes produced more free cash flow last quarter ($210.0M vs $-1.5B). Over the past eight quarters, Venture Global, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (77.3% 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, ...
S&P Global Inc. is an American publicly traded corporation headquartered in Manhattan, New York. Its primary areas of business are financial information, analytics, and energy and commodities intelligence. It is the parent company of S&P Global Ratings, S&P Global Energy, S&P Global Market Intelligence, S&P Global Mobility, and the Indian credit rating agency CRISIL. It is also the majority owner of the S&P Dow Jones Indices joint venture. "S&P" is a shortening of "Standard and Poor's".
BKR vs VG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $6.6B | $4.4B |
| Net Profit | $930.0M | $1.2B |
| Gross Margin | 22.8% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 38.7% |
| Net Margin | 14.1% | 26.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -7.5% | 191.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 131.3% | 20.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.93 | $0.41 |
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 | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.0B | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.9B | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.4B | $2.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.4B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.9B | $926.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.1B | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | $930.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $876.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $609.0M | $550.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $701.0M | $475.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $402.0M | $517.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $990.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $766.0M | $-294.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $579.0M | $352.0M |
| Q1 26 | 22.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.1% | 38.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.7% | 39.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.0% | 33.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.7% | 37.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.0% | 39.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.5% | 20.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.7% | 32.8% |
| Q1 26 | 14.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 11.9% | 26.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.7% | 16.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.1% | 15.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.3% | 17.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.0% | 65.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.1% | -31.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.1% | 31.8% |
| Q1 26 | $0.93 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $0.41 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.16 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.14 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.15 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.35 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.15 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.12 |
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 | $2.4B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $16.2B | $34.2B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $19.5B | $6.7B |
| Total Assets | $50.9B | $53.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.83× | 5.07× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $14.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $16.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.4B | $34.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.0B | $32.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.0B | $30.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.0B | $29.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.0B | $29.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.0B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.9B | — |
| Q1 26 | $19.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $18.8B | $6.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.2B | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.7B | $5.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.0B | $4.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.9B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $16.2B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.6B | — |
| Q1 26 | $50.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $40.9B | $53.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $39.2B | $50.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.7B | $46.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $38.1B | $45.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $38.4B | $43.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $37.5B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $36.7B | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.83× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.29× | 5.07× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.33× | 5.73× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.34× | 5.69× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.35× | 6.01× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.35× | 10.11× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.37× | — | ||
| 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 | — | $2.1B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $210.0M | $-1.5B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 3.2% | -34.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 4.4% | 81.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.77× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $2.3B | $-6.8B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $929.0M | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $510.0M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $709.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $348.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | $210.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $-1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $634.0M | $-1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $209.0M | $-1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $409.0M | $-2.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $837.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $710.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $56.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | 3.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.4% | -34.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.0% | -42.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.0% | -49.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.4% | -81.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 11.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.8% | — |
| Q1 26 | 4.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.1% | 81.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.2% | 98.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.4% | 96.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.7% | 119.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.1% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.90× | 1.77× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.53× | 3.42× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.73× | 3.07× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.76× | 2.15× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.01× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.32× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.60× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BKR
Segment breakdown not available.
VG
| Plaquemines Project Segment | $3.4B | 76% |
| Calcasieu Project Segment | $841.0M | 19% |
| Other | $208.0M | 5% |
