vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Celanese Corp (CE) and Restaurant Brands International Inc. (QSR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Restaurant Brands International Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.5B vs $2.2B, roughly 1.1× Celanese Corp). Restaurant Brands International Inc. runs the higher net margin — 6.3% vs 0.6%, a 5.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Restaurant Brands International Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (7.4% vs -7.0%). Restaurant Brands International Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($453.0M vs $168.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Restaurant Brands International Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (19.1% 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).
Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI) is an American-Canadian multinational fast food holding company. It was formed in 2014 by the $12.5 billion merger between American fast food restaurant chain Burger King and Canadian coffee shop and restaurant chain Tim Hortons, and expanded by the purchases of Popeyes and Firehouse Subs in 2017 and 2021, respectively. The company is the fifth-largest operator of fast food restaurants in the world after Subway, McDonald's, Starbucks and Yum! Brands....
CE vs QSR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.2B | $2.5B |
| Net Profit | $14.0M | $155.0M |
| Gross Margin | 19.1% | — |
| Operating Margin | 4.0% | 25.2% |
| Net Margin | 0.6% | 6.3% |
| Revenue YoY | -7.0% | 7.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 100.7% | -57.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.13 | $0.33 |
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.
| Q4 25 | $2.2B | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | $2.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.4B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.6B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.7B | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.6B | $1.7B |
| Q4 25 | $14.0M | $155.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.4B | $436.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $199.0M | $263.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-21.0M | $221.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.9B | $361.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $357.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $155.0M | $399.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $121.0M | $328.0M |
| 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 24 | 21.2% | 65.2% |
| Q4 25 | 4.0% | 25.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -52.7% | 27.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.2% | 20.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.0% | 20.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -59.3% | 27.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.4% | 25.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.4% | 31.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.0% | 31.3% |
| Q4 25 | 0.6% | 6.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -56.1% | 17.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.9% | 10.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.9% | 10.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -80.8% | 15.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.4% | 15.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.8% | 19.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.6% | 18.9% |
| Q4 25 | $0.13 | $0.33 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-12.39 | $0.96 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.81 | $0.57 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.19 | $0.49 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-17.50 | $0.79 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.06 | $0.79 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.41 | $0.88 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.10 | $0.72 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $11.4B | $13.3B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $4.0B | $3.6B |
| Total Assets | $21.7B | $25.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 2.81× | 3.65× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $11.4B | $13.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.7B | $13.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.7B | $13.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.4B | $13.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.1B | $13.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.3B | $13.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.1B | $13.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.0B | $12.9B |
| Q4 25 | $4.0B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.0B | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.3B | $3.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.3B | $3.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.1B | $3.0B |
| Q4 25 | $21.7B | $25.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.2B | $25.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.7B | $25.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.2B | $24.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $22.9B | $24.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $25.9B | $25.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.8B | $24.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $26.0B | $23.1B |
| Q4 25 | 2.81× | 3.65× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.95× | 3.99× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.41× | 4.10× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.39× | 4.37× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.14× | 4.39× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.56× | 4.22× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.54× | 4.46× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.56× | 4.35× |
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 | $555.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $168.0M | $453.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 7.6% | 18.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.8% | 4.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 18.00× | 3.58× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $803.0M | $1.4B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $252.0M | $555.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $447.0M | $592.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $410.0M | $449.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $37.0M | $118.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $494.0M | $481.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $79.0M | $540.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $292.0M | $334.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $101.0M | $148.0M |
| Q4 25 | $168.0M | $453.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $383.0M | $531.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $317.0M | $411.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-65.0M | $54.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $389.0M | $404.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.0M | $485.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $187.0M | $291.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-36.0M | $122.0M |
| Q4 25 | 7.6% | 18.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.8% | 21.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.5% | 17.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.7% | 2.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.4% | 17.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.3% | 21.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.1% | 14.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.4% | 7.0% |
| Q4 25 | 3.8% | 4.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.6% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.7% | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | 3.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.4% | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.3% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.2% | 1.5% |
| Q4 25 | 18.00× | 3.58× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.36× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.06× | 1.71× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.53× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.33× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.68× | 1.51× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.88× | 0.84× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.83× | 0.45× |
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% |
QSR
| CA | $1.0B | 41% |
| Other | $330.0M | 13% |
| Advertising | $308.0M | 12% |
| Others | $284.0M | 12% |
| Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen | $195.0M | 8% |
| Burger King | $185.0M | 8% |
| Royalty | $87.0M | 4% |
| Firehouse Subs | $59.0M | 2% |
| Franchisor | $7.0M | 0% |
