vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE (CM) and ConocoPhillips (COP). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ConocoPhillips is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($11.4B vs $6.1B, roughly 1.9× CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE). CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE runs the higher net margin — 36.9% vs 12.7%, a 24.2% gap on every dollar of revenue.
The Imperial Bank of Canada was a Canadian bank that operated from 1873 to 1961. In 1961, Imperial merged with the Canadian Bank of Commerce to become the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce.
ConocoPhillips Company is an American multinational corporation engaged in hydrocarbon exploration and production. It is based in the Energy Corridor district of Houston, Texas.
CM vs COP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $6.1B | $11.4B |
| Net Profit | $2.3B | $1.4B |
| Gross Margin | — | 54.4% |
| Operating Margin | — | 19.7% |
| Net Margin | 36.9% | 12.7% |
| Revenue YoY | — | -10.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -37.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $1.18 |
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 | $6.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $11.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.3B | $13.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.1B | $12.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $14.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $12.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $11.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $12.7B |
| Q1 26 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.5B | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.3B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 54.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 56.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 59.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 57.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 60.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 59.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 61.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 19.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 22.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 23.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 30.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 23.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 27.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 28.9% |
| Q1 26 | 36.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 12.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 28.9% | 12.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 28.6% | 15.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 19.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 18.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 17.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 18.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.18 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.38 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.56 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.23 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.92 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.76 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.98 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $8.0B | $7.0B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $22.4B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $47.9B | $64.5B |
| Total Assets | $826.8B | $121.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.35× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $8.0B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $7.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.9B | $6.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.2B | $5.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $7.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $6.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $6.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $6.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $22.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $22.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $23.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $23.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $23.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $17.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $17.0B |
| Q1 26 | $47.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $64.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $45.9B | $64.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $45.2B | $65.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $65.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $64.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $49.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $49.7B |
| Q1 26 | $826.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $121.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $804.6B | $122.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $795.8B | $122.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $124.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $122.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $96.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $96.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.35× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.35× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.35× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.36× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.36× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.34× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.34× |
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 | $-1.6B | $4.3B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -0.69× | 2.99× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $-1.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $4.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.3B | $5.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $667.2M | $3.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $6.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $5.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $4.9B |
| Q1 26 | -0.69× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 2.99× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.80× | 3.41× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.46× | 1.77× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.15× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.93× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.80× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.11× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CM
Segment breakdown not available.
COP
| Natural Gas Reserves | $2.1B | 18% |
| Physical Gas Contracts | $2.0B | 18% |
| Europe Middle East And North Africa Segment | $1.6B | 14% |
| Natural Gas Product Line | $1.5B | 13% |
| Canada Operating Segment | $1.3B | 12% |
| Alaska Segment | $1.3B | 11% |
| Natural Gas Liquids Reserves | $826.0M | 7% |
| Asia Pacific Operating Segment | $360.0M | 3% |
| Crude Oil Product Line | $236.0M | 2% |
| Related Party | $12.0M | 0% |
| Corporate Segment | $7.0M | 0% |
