vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Dutch Bros Inc. (BROS) and O’Reilly Automotive (ORLY), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
O’Reilly Automotive is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.4B vs $443.6M, roughly 10.0× Dutch Bros Inc.). O’Reilly Automotive runs the higher net margin — 4.8% vs 13.7%, a 8.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Dutch Bros Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (29.4% vs 7.8%). O’Reilly Automotive produced more free cash flow last quarter ($364.5M vs $8.5M). Over the past eight quarters, Dutch Bros Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (27.0% CAGR vs 5.4%).
Dutch Bros Inc., originally written Dutch Bros., is a publicly held drive-through coffee chain in the United States. Founded in 1992 by Dane and Travis Boersma, it is headquartered in Tempe, Arizona, after having been based in Grants Pass, Oregon, for many years prior to 2025. It has company-owned and franchise locations primarily located in the Western United States, although the company has expanded as far east as Orlando, Florida.
O'Reilly Automotive, Inc., doing business as O'Reilly Auto Parts, is an American automotive part retailer that provides automotive parts, tools, supplies, equipment, and accessories to professional service providers and do-it-yourself customers. Founded in 1957 by the O’Reilly family, O'Reilly Auto Parts operates more than 6,400 stores in 48 states, Puerto Rico, Mexico, and Canada.
BROS vs ORLY — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $443.6M | $4.4B |
| Net Profit | $21.4M | $605.2M |
| Gross Margin | 24.1% | 51.8% |
| Operating Margin | 7.7% | 18.8% |
| Net Margin | 4.8% | 13.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 29.4% | 7.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 491.6% | 9.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.17 | $-8.01 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $443.6M | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $423.6M | $4.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $415.8M | $4.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $355.2M | $4.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $342.8M | $4.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $338.2M | $4.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $324.9M | $4.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $275.1M | $4.0B |
| Q4 25 | $21.4M | $605.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $17.5M | $725.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $25.6M | $668.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $15.4M | $538.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.6M | $551.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.6M | $665.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.9M | $622.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.1M | $547.2M |
| Q4 25 | 24.1% | 51.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.2% | 51.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 28.9% | 51.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 25.3% | 51.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.7% | 51.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.6% | 51.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 27.8% | 50.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 26.1% | 51.2% |
| Q4 25 | 7.7% | 18.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.8% | 20.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.1% | 20.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.7% | 17.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.6% | 18.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.6% | 20.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.9% | 20.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 9.3% | 18.9% |
| Q4 25 | 4.8% | 13.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.1% | 15.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.2% | 14.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | 13.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.1% | 13.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.7% | 15.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.7% | 14.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 13.8% |
| Q4 25 | $0.17 | $-8.01 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.14 | $0.85 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.20 | $0.78 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.13 | $9.35 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.03 | $9.50 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.11 | $11.41 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.12 | $10.55 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.08 | $9.20 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $269.4M | $193.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $202.5M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $680.8M | $-763.4M |
| Total Assets | $3.0B | $16.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.30× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $269.4M | $193.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $267.2M | $204.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $254.4M | $198.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $316.4M | $191.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $293.4M | $130.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $281.1M | $115.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $260.9M | $145.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $262.7M | $89.3M |
| Q4 25 | $202.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $202.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $203.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $284.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $238.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $241.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $244.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $247.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | $680.8M | $-763.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $656.6M | $-894.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $636.2M | $-1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $599.1M | $-1.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $537.4M | $-1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $523.1M | $-1.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $509.1M | $-1.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $417.1M | $-1.4B |
| Q4 25 | $3.0B | $16.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9B | $16.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8B | $15.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.8B | $15.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.5B | $14.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4B | $14.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.4B | $14.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | $14.2B |
| Q4 25 | 0.30× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.31× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.32× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.47× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.44× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.46× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.48× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.59× | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $79.6M | $633.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $8.5M | $364.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 1.9% | 8.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 16.0% | 6.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 3.73× | 1.05× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $54.4M | $1.6B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $79.6M | $633.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $89.1M | $616.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $89.9M | $756.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $36.9M | $755.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $62.2M | $624.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $83.5M | $772.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $59.5M | $948.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $41.2M | $704.2M |
| Q4 25 | $8.5M | $364.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.9M | $304.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $35.7M | $456.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-8.7M | $468.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.5M | $334.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $26.4M | $513.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-4.9M | $723.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-16.3M | $455.0M |
| Q4 25 | 1.9% | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.5% | 6.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.6% | 10.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.4% | 11.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.7% | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.8% | 11.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.5% | 16.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -5.9% | 11.4% |
| Q4 25 | 16.0% | 6.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.6% | 6.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.0% | 6.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.8% | 6.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.5% | 7.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.9% | 5.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.8% | 5.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 20.9% | 6.3% |
| Q4 25 | 3.73× | 1.05× | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.09× | 0.85× | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.51× | 1.13× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.40× | 1.40× | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.23× | 1.13× | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.60× | 1.16× | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.99× | 1.52× | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.83× | 1.29× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BROS
| Company Operated Shops | $409.6M | 92% |
| Franchise Fees | $32.3M | 7% |
| Other | $1.8M | 0% |
ORLY
| DIY Customer | $2.2B | 49% |
| Professional Service Provider Customer | $2.1B | 49% |
| Other Customers And Sales Adjustments | $84.4M | 2% |
