vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CELESTICA INC (CLS) and LEAR CORP (LEA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LEAR CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($6.0B vs $4.0B, roughly 1.5× CELESTICA INC). CELESTICA INC runs the higher net margin — 5.2% vs 1.4%, a 3.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, CELESTICA INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (52.8% vs 4.8%). LEAR CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($281.1M vs $137.9M). Over the past eight quarters, CELESTICA INC's revenue compounded faster (35.4% CAGR vs -0.1%).
Celestica Inc. is a Canadian multinational design, manufacturing, hardware platform, and supply chain electronics manufacturing services (EMS) company, which is headquartered in Toronto, Ontario. The company operates in 50 sites across 15 countries.
Lear Corporation is an American company that manufactures automotive seating and electrical systems. In 2019, it ranked #147 and in 2018, it ranked #148 on the Fortune 500 list.
CLS vs LEA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.0B | $6.0B |
| Net Profit | $212.3M | $82.7M |
| Gross Margin | 10.8% | 5.7% |
| Operating Margin | 6723.5% | 2.6% |
| Net Margin | 5.2% | 1.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 52.8% | 4.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 146.3% | -6.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.83 | $1.58 |
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 | $4.0B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.7B | $6.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.2B | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9B | $6.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.6B | $5.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $5.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.5B | $5.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.4B | $6.0B |
| Q1 26 | $212.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $267.5M | $82.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $267.8M | $108.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $211.0M | $165.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $86.2M | $80.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $88.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $89.5M | $135.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $95.0M | $173.1M |
| Q1 26 | 10.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 11.8% | 5.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.0% | 6.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.8% | 7.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.3% | 6.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 6.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.4% | 7.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.6% | 7.5% |
| Q1 26 | 6723.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 8.6% | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.2% | 3.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.4% | 4.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.9% | 3.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.5% | 3.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.6% | 4.3% |
| Q1 26 | 5.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.3% | 1.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.4% | 1.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.3% | 2.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.3% | 1.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.6% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 2.9% |
| Q1 26 | $1.83 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.29 | $1.58 | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.31 | $2.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.82 | $3.06 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.74 | $1.49 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.64 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.75 | $2.41 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.80 | $3.02 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $378.0M | $1.0B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $2.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.1B | $5.0B |
| Total Assets | $8260.0B | $14.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.54× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $378.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $595.6M | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $305.9M | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $313.8M | $887.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $303.0M | $779.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $763.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $950.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $750.5M | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $756.7M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $848.6M | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $915.0M | $2.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.7B |
| Q1 26 | $2.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.2B | $5.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $5.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $5.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | $4.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8B | $4.8B |
| Q1 26 | $8260.0B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.2B | $14.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.6B | $15.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.2B | $15.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.8B | $14.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $14.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $14.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $14.7B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.34× | 0.54× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.37× | 0.54× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.48× | 0.54× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.59× | 0.59× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.61× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.58× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.57× |
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 | $356.3M | $475.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $137.9M | $281.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 3.4% | 4.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 3.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.68× | 5.75× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $502.6M | $527.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $356.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $250.6M | $475.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $126.2M | $444.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $152.4M | $296.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $130.3M | $-127.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $680.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $122.8M | $182.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $99.6M | $291.2M |
| Q1 26 | $137.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $155.9M | $281.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $88.9M | $307.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $119.9M | $170.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $93.6M | $-231.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $488.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $76.8M | $50.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $62.7M | $170.4M |
| Q1 26 | 3.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.3% | 4.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.8% | 5.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.1% | 2.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.5% | -4.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 8.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.1% | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.6% | 2.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.6% | 3.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.2% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.1% | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.4% | 1.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.8% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.5% | 2.0% |
| Q1 26 | 1.68× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.94× | 5.75× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.47× | 4.11× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.72× | 1.79× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.51× | -1.58× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.73× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.37× | 1.35× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.05× | 1.68× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CLS
Segment breakdown not available.
LEA
| Other | $3.5B | 59% |
| Seating Segment | $1.9B | 32% |
| E Systems Segment | $520.6M | 9% |
