vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CNH Industrial N.V. (CNH) and M&T Bank (MTB). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
CNH Industrial N.V. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.5B vs $2.5B, roughly 1.8× M&T Bank). M&T Bank runs the higher net margin — 30.7% vs 1.9%, a 28.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, CNH Industrial N.V. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (7.8% vs 3.8%). Over the past eight quarters, M&T Bank's revenue compounded faster (4.6% CAGR vs 3.8%).
CNH Industrial N.V.CNHEarnings & Financial Report
CNH Industrial NV is an Italian-American multinational corporation with global headquarters in Basildon, United Kingdom, but controlled and mostly owned by the multinational investment company Exor, which in turn is controlled by the Agnelli family. Through its various businesses, CNH Industrial designs, produces, and sells agricultural machinery and construction equipment. Present in all major markets worldwide, CNH Industrial is focused on expanding its presence in high-growth markets, incl...
M&T Bank Corporation is an American bank holding company headquartered in Buffalo, New York. It operates 950+ branches in 12 states and Washington D.C. across the Eastern United States, from Maine to Virginia. Until May 1998, the bank's holding company was named First Empire State Corporation.
CNH vs MTB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.5B | $2.5B |
| Net Profit | $86.0M | $759.0M |
| Gross Margin | 18.4% | — |
| Operating Margin | 3.0% | 39.2% |
| Net Margin | 1.9% | 30.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 7.8% | 3.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -18.9% | 11.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.08 | $4.62 |
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 | $4.5B | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.7B | $2.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.0B | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.1B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.0B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.8B | $2.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.1B | $2.3B |
| Q4 25 | $86.0M | $759.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $80.0M | $792.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $213.0M | $716.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $131.0M | $584.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $106.0M | $681.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $306.0M | $721.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $433.0M | $655.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $401.0M | $531.0M |
| Q4 25 | 18.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 21.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 22.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | 3.0% | 39.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.4% | 40.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.8% | 39.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.1% | 33.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.8% | 37.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.6% | 39.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.1% | 37.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 11.6% | 29.4% |
| Q4 25 | 1.9% | 30.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.2% | 31.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.3% | 29.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.1% | 25.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.6% | 28.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.7% | 30.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.0% | 28.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 9.7% | 23.5% |
| Q4 25 | $0.08 | $4.62 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.06 | $4.82 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.17 | $4.24 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.10 | $3.32 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.10 | $3.87 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.24 | $4.02 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.34 | $3.73 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.31 | $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 | $2.6B | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $10.9B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $7.8B | $29.2B |
| Total Assets | $42.7B | $213.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.37× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.2B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.2B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $10.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $12.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $12.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $10.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $12.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $11.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $11.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $11.4B |
| Q4 25 | $7.8B | $29.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.8B | $28.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.8B | $28.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.9B | $29.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.7B | $29.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.7B | $28.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.6B | $28.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.0B | $27.2B |
| Q4 25 | $42.7B | $213.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $43.3B | $211.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $43.7B | $211.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $42.1B | $210.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $42.9B | $208.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $44.0B | $211.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $44.0B | $208.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $45.7B | $215.1B |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.37× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.45× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.43× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.36× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.43× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.42× |
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 | $945.0M | $3.0B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 10.99× | 3.96× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $945.0M | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $659.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $772.0M | $844.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $162.0M | $635.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.7B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $791.0M | $-28.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $379.0M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $-894.0M | $608.0M |
| Q4 25 | 10.99× | 3.96× | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.24× | 1.26× | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.62× | 1.18× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.24× | 1.09× | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.96× | 5.30× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.58× | -0.04× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.88× | 2.07× | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.23× | 1.15× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CNH
| Agricultural Equipment Segment | $3.6B | 81% |
| Construction Equipment Segment | $853.0M | 19% |
| Services | $18.0M | 0% |
MTB
Segment breakdown not available.
