vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Celanese Corp (CE) and LANDSTAR SYSTEM INC (LSTR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Celanese Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.2B vs $1.2B, roughly 1.9× LANDSTAR SYSTEM INC). LANDSTAR SYSTEM INC runs the higher net margin — 3.4% vs 0.6%, a 2.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, LANDSTAR SYSTEM INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (1.6% vs -7.0%). Over the past eight quarters, LANDSTAR SYSTEM INC's revenue compounded faster (-2.2% CAGR vs -8.1%).
Celanese Corporation, formerly known as Hoechst Celanese, is an American technology and specialty materials company headquartered in Irving, Texas. It is a Fortune 500 corporation. The company is the world's leading producer of acetic acid, producing about 1.95 million tonnes per year, representing approximately 20% of global production. Celanese is also the world's largest producer of vinyl acetate monomer (VAM).
Landstar System, Inc. is an American transportation services company specializing in logistics and, more specifically, third-party logistics. Landstar utilizes an extensive network of over 8,800 independent owner-operators, referred to internally as business capacity owners (BCOs), over 1,000 independent freight agents, and over 70,000 vetted carriers. Landstar provides services principally throughout the United States and to a lesser extent in Canada and between the U.S. and Canada, Mexico, ...
CE vs LSTR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.2B | $1.2B |
| Net Profit | $14.0M | $39.4M |
| Gross Margin | 19.1% | 9.6% |
| Operating Margin | 4.0% | 4.5% |
| Net Margin | 0.6% | 3.4% |
| Revenue YoY | -7.0% | 1.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | 100.7% | 32.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.13 | $1.16 |
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 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.6B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.7B | $1.2B |
| Q1 26 | — | $39.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | $14.0M | $23.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.4B | $19.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $199.0M | $41.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-21.0M | $29.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.9B | $46.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $50.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $155.0M | $52.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | 9.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | 19.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 21.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 24.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | 4.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.0% | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -52.7% | 2.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.2% | 4.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.0% | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | -59.3% | 4.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.4% | 5.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.4% | 5.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.6% | 2.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -56.1% | 1.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.9% | 3.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.9% | 2.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -80.8% | 3.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.4% | 4.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.8% | 4.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.16 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.13 | $0.70 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-12.39 | $0.56 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.81 | $1.20 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.19 | $0.85 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-17.50 | $1.30 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.06 | $1.41 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.41 | $1.48 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $411.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $11.4B | $26.1M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $4.0B | $799.0M |
| Total Assets | $21.7B | $1.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 2.81× | 0.03× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $411.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $452.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $434.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $426.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $473.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $566.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $531.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $504.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $26.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $11.4B | $0 | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.7B | $0 | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.7B | $0 | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.4B | $0 | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.1B | $0 | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.3B | $0 | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.1B | $0 |
| Q1 26 | — | $799.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.0B | $795.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.0B | $888.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.3B | $921.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.2B | $930.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.2B | $972.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.3B | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.2B | $1.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 25 | $21.7B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.2B | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.7B | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.2B | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $22.9B | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $25.9B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.8B | $1.8B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.03× | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.81× | 0.00× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.95× | 0.00× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.41× | 0.00× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.39× | 0.00× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.14× | 0.00× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.56× | 0.00× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.54× | 0.00× |
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 | $252.0M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $168.0M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 7.6% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.8% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 18.00× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $803.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $252.0M | $72.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $447.0M | $89.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $410.0M | $7.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $37.0M | $55.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $494.0M | $61.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $79.0M | $83.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $292.0M | $48.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $168.0M | $70.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $383.0M | $86.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $317.0M | $4.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-65.0M | $53.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $389.0M | $54.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.0M | $75.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $187.0M | $40.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.6% | 6.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.8% | 7.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.5% | 0.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.7% | 4.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.4% | 4.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.3% | 6.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.1% | 3.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.8% | 0.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.6% | 0.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.7% | 0.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | 0.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.4% | 0.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.3% | 0.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 0.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 18.00× | 3.04× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.61× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.06× | 0.17× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.87× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.32× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.68× | 1.66× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.88× | 0.91× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CE
| Engineered Materials | $1.3B | 58% |
| Acetyl Chain | $940.0M | 43% |
LSTR
Segment breakdown not available.
