vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Cadence Design Systems (CDNS) and AMERICOLD REALTY TRUST (COLD). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Cadence Design Systems is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.3B vs $643.1M, roughly 2.0× AMERICOLD REALTY TRUST). Cadence Design Systems runs the higher net margin — 22.8% vs -13.7%, a 36.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMERICOLD REALTY TRUST posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-0.7% vs -16.1%). Cadence Design Systems produced more free cash flow last quarter ($464.0M vs $-12.2M). Over the past eight quarters, Cadence Design Systems's revenue compounded faster (9.6% CAGR vs -0.6%).
Cadence Design Systems, Inc. is an American multinational technology and computational software company headquartered in San Jose, California. Initially specialized in electronic design automation (EDA) software for the semiconductor industry, currently the company makes software and hardware for designing products such as integrated circuits, systems on chips (SoCs), printed circuit boards, and pharmaceutical drugs, also licensing intellectual property for the electronics, aerospace, defense an...
Americold Realty Trust, Inc. is an American temperature controlled warehousing and transportation company based in Atlanta, Georgia, United States. It is in the business of modern commercialized temperature controlled warehousing for the storage of perishable goods via a cold chain, one of the forms of food preservation. Americold is the 2nd largest temperature-controlled warehousing and distribution services provider in the world.
CDNS vs COLD — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.3B | $643.1M |
| Net Profit | $335.7M | $-88.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | 31.3% |
| Operating Margin | 29.3% | -10.8% |
| Net Margin | 22.8% | -13.7% |
| Revenue YoY | -16.1% | -0.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 22.7% | -143.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.00 | $-0.31 |
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 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.4B | $643.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $649.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $635.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $613.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $647.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $660.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $645.6M |
| Q1 26 | $335.7M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $388.1M | $-88.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $287.1M | $-11.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $160.1M | $1.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $273.6M | $-16.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $340.2M | $-36.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $238.1M | $-3.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $229.5M | $-64.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 31.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 29.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 30.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 31.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 29.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 29.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 31.0% |
| Q1 26 | 29.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 32.2% | -10.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 31.8% | 2.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.0% | 5.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 29.1% | 3.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 33.7% | -1.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 28.8% | 4.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 27.7% | 9.8% |
| Q1 26 | 22.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 27.0% | -13.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.4% | -1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.5% | 0.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 22.0% | -2.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.1% | -5.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.6% | -0.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.6% | -9.9% |
| Q1 26 | $1.00 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.42 | $-0.31 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.05 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.59 | $0.01 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.00 | $-0.06 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.23 | $-0.12 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.87 | $-0.01 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.84 | $-0.23 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.8B | $136.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $2.5B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $6.6B | $2.9B |
| Total Assets | $12.1B | $8.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.38× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $2.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.2B | $136.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.8B | $33.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8B | $101.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.8B | $38.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.8B | $47.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8B | $61.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $44.2M |
| Q1 26 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $6.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.5B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.2B | $3.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.0B | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.8B | $3.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.7B | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.6B | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.3B | $3.4B |
| Q1 26 | $12.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $10.2B | $8.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.6B | $8.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.5B | $8.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.0B | $7.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.0B | $7.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.2B | $7.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.2B | $7.8B |
| Q1 26 | 0.38× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
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 | $355.8M | $130.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $464.0M | $-12.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 36.4% | -1.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.1% | 22.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.06× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.6B | $-217.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $355.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $553.5M | $130.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $310.7M | $78.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $377.6M | $120.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $487.0M | $30.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $441.4M | $162.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $410.0M | $50.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $156.0M | $136.7M |
| Q1 26 | $464.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $512.5M | $-12.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $277.0M | $-65.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $333.5M | $-57.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $464.0M | $-82.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $404.2M | $57.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $383.5M | $-44.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $126.8M | $73.3M |
| Q1 26 | 36.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 35.6% | -1.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.7% | -10.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.1% | -9.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 37.3% | -13.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 29.8% | 8.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 31.5% | -6.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.0% | 11.4% |
| Q1 26 | 5.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.8% | 22.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.5% | 22.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.5% | 28.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.9% | 18.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.7% | 16.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.2% | 14.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.8% | 9.8% |
| Q1 26 | 1.06× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.43× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.08× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.36× | 78.18× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.78× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.30× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.72× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.68× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CDNS
| Product and Maintenance | $1.1B | 87% |
| Services | $131.0M | 10% |
| Other | $33.0M | 3% |
COLD
| Warehouse Services | $269.0M | 42% |
| Warehouse Rent And Storage | $199.9M | 31% |
| Other Facilities Costs | $60.0M | 9% |
| Transportation Segment | $48.3M | 8% |
| Power | $34.7M | 5% |
| Transportation | $22.0M | 3% |
| Third Party Managed Segment | $9.5M | 1% |
| Third Party Managed | $2.4M | 0% |
