vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Carrier Global (CARR) and Lennox International (LII), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Carrier Global is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.8B vs $1.2B, roughly 4.0× Lennox International). Lennox International runs the higher net margin — 1.1% vs 13.6%, a 12.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Carrier Global posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (33.2% vs -11.2%). Carrier Global produced more free cash flow last quarter ($909.0M vs $376.7M). Over the past eight quarters, Lennox International's revenue compounded faster (6.8% CAGR vs -11.5%).
Carrier Global Corporation is an American multinational heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), refrigeration, and fire and security equipment corporation based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. Carrier was founded in 1915 as an independent company manufacturing and distributing HVAC systems, and has since expanded to include manufacturing commercial refrigeration and food service equipment, and fire and security technologies.
Lennox International Inc. is an American provider of climate control products for the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) and refrigeration markets. Based in Richardson, Texas, the company is 9.8% owned by John W. Norris, III, a descendant of DW Norris, who acquired the company in 1904. The company's largest production facilities are in Saltillo, Mexico, Marshalltown, Iowa, and Orangeburg, South Carolina.
CARR vs LII — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.8B | $1.2B |
| Net Profit | $53.0M | $162.1M |
| Gross Margin | — | 34.7% |
| Operating Margin | 2.1% | 18.6% |
| Net Margin | 1.1% | 13.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 33.2% | -11.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -97.9% | -18.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.07 | $4.62 |
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 | $4.8B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.6B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.1B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.2B | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.6B | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.7B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.2B | $1.0B |
| Q4 25 | $53.0M | $162.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $428.0M | $245.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $591.0M | $277.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $412.0M | $120.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.6B | $197.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $447.0M | $239.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.3B | $245.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $269.0M | $124.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | 34.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 32.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 34.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 30.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 33.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 32.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 33.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 32.5% |
| Q4 25 | 2.1% | 18.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.7% | 21.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.8% | 23.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.1% | 14.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -63.6% | 18.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.8% | 20.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 55.2% | 22.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.1% | 15.9% |
| Q4 25 | 1.1% | 13.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.7% | 17.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.7% | 18.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.9% | 11.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 70.3% | 14.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.5% | 16.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.9% | 16.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.4% | 11.9% |
| Q4 25 | $0.07 | $4.62 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.50 | $6.98 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.68 | $7.82 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.47 | $3.37 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.82 | $5.52 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.49 | $6.68 | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.55 | $6.87 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.29 | $3.47 |
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 | $1.6B | $34.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $11.4B | $1.1B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $14.1B | $1.2B |
| Total Assets | $37.2B | $4.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.80× | 0.98× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | $34.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $59.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $55.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $222.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.0B | $422.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.2B | $255.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.9B | $57.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.3B | $57.6M |
| Q4 25 | $11.4B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.3B | $838.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $11.3B | $835.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.1B | $834.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.0B | $833.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $10.3B | $827.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.3B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $15.6B | $1.2B |
| Q4 25 | $14.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.8B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.0B | $900.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $14.2B | $852.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.4B | $850.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $15.0B | $754.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.1B | $577.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.9B | $368.8M |
| Q4 25 | $37.2B | $4.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $38.1B | $3.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.5B | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $36.4B | $3.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $37.4B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $40.2B | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $40.4B | $3.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $40.8B | $3.0B |
| Q4 25 | 0.80× | 0.98× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.76× | 0.78× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.76× | 0.93× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.78× | 0.98× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.77× | 0.98× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.69× | 1.10× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.80× | 1.95× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.31× | 3.13× |
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 | $1.0B | $405.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $909.0M | $376.7M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 18.8% | 31.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 2.7% | 2.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 19.62× | 2.50× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $2.1B | $638.8M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $405.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $341.0M | $300.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $649.0M | $86.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $483.0M | $-35.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $132.0M | $332.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-269.0M | $452.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $660.0M | $184.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $40.0M | $-22.8M |
| Q4 25 | $909.0M | $376.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $224.0M | $265.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $568.0M | $58.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $420.0M | $-61.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-85.0M | $272.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-356.0M | $410.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $549.0M | $151.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-64.0M | $-52.3M |
| Q4 25 | 18.8% | 31.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.0% | 18.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | 3.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.0% | -5.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -2.3% | 20.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -5.9% | 27.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.2% | 10.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.0% | -5.0% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 2.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.1% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 1.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | 2.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.0% | 4.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.5% | 2.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.7% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.7% | 2.8% |
| Q4 25 | 19.62× | 2.50× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.80× | 1.22× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.10× | 0.31× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.17× | -0.30× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.05× | 1.68× | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.60× | 1.89× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.28× | 0.75× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.15× | -0.18× |
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
CARR
| Products | $4.1B | 86% |
| Services | $699.0M | 14% |
LII
| Residential Heating And Cooling | $699.8M | 59% |
| Commercial Heating And Cooling | $495.2M | 41% |
