vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. (CQP) and Lam Research (LRCX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Lam Research is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($5.3B vs $2.9B, roughly 1.8× Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P.). Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. runs the higher net margin — 44.2% vs 29.8%, a 14.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Lam Research posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (22.1% vs 18.3%). Lam Research produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.2B vs $864.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Lam Research's revenue compounded faster (18.7% CAGR vs 12.6%).
Total revenue of oil and gas companies is listed in billions of U.S. dollars. Total revenue is usually self-reported by companies, and often reported by neutral, unbiased, reliable publications. Reported data may be subsequently revised or restated due to a wide range of issues such as exchange rates, contract settlements, or mid-year discontinuation of products or services. Fiscal years are for January 1 to December 31, except where noted. Empty cells indicate that no data for that year has ...
Lam Research Corporation is an American supplier of wafer-fabrication equipment and related services to the semiconductor industry. Its products are used primarily in front-end wafer processing, which involves the steps that create the active components of semiconductor devices and their wiring (interconnects). The company also builds equipment for back-end wafer-level packaging (WLP) and for related manufacturing markets such as for microelectromechanical systems (MEMS).
CQP vs LRCX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.9B | $5.3B |
| Net Profit | $1.3B | $1.6B |
| Gross Margin | — | 49.6% |
| Operating Margin | 50.5% | 33.9% |
| Net Margin | 44.2% | 29.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 18.3% | 22.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 106.6% | 33.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $1.26 |
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 | $2.9B | $5.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4B | $5.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | $5.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.0B | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.5B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.1B | $4.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.9B | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.3B | $3.8B |
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $506.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $553.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $641.0M | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $623.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $635.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $570.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $682.0M | $965.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | 49.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 50.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 50.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 49.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 47.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 48.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 47.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 47.5% |
| Q4 25 | 50.5% | 33.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.0% | 34.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 29.1% | 33.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 27.6% | 33.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 33.0% | 30.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 40.2% | 30.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 40.4% | 29.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 38.1% | 27.9% |
| Q4 25 | 44.2% | 29.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.0% | 29.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.5% | 33.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.4% | 28.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.3% | 27.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 30.9% | 26.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 30.1% | 26.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 29.7% | 25.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.26 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.24 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.34 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.03 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.92 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.86 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $7.78 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $7.34 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $182.0M | $6.2B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $14.2B | $3.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $10.1B |
| Total Assets | $17.4B | $21.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.37× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $182.0M | $6.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $121.0M | $6.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.0M | $6.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $94.0M | $5.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $270.0M | $5.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $331.0M | $6.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $351.0M | $5.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $333.0M | $5.7B |
| Q4 25 | $14.2B | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.2B | $3.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.2B | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $14.7B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.8B | $4.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.8B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.8B | $4.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $13.6B | $4.5B |
| Q4 25 | — | $10.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $10.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $9.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $9.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $8.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $8.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $8.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $8.0B |
| Q4 25 | $17.4B | $21.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.8B | $21.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $16.9B | $21.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.1B | $20.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.5B | $19.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.4B | $19.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.5B | $18.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $17.5B | $18.3B |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.37× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.37× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.38× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.39× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.51× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.53× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.52× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.56× |
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 | $887.0M | $1.5B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $864.0M | $1.2B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 29.7% | 22.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.8% | 4.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.69× | 0.93× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $2.6B | $6.2B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $887.0M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $658.0M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $558.0M | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $665.0M | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $876.0M | $741.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $691.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $732.0M | $862.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $669.0M | $1.4B |
| Q4 25 | $864.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $610.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $490.0M | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $605.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $827.0M | $553.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $652.0M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $702.0M | $761.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $633.0M | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | 29.7% | 22.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.4% | 29.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.0% | 46.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.2% | 21.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 33.6% | 12.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 31.7% | 35.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 37.1% | 19.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 27.6% | 33.8% |
| Q4 25 | 0.8% | 4.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.0% | 3.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.8% | 3.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.0% | 6.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.0% | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.9% | 2.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.6% | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.6% | 2.7% |
| Q4 25 | 0.69× | 0.93× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.30× | 1.13× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.01× | 1.48× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.04× | 0.98× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.41× | 0.62× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.09× | 1.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.28× | 0.85× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.98× | 1.43× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CQP
| Liquefied Natural Gas | $2.9B | 98% |
| Regasification Service | $34.0M | 1% |
| Other | $17.0M | 1% |
LRCX
| System | $3.4B | 63% |
| Customer Supportand Other | $2.0B | 37% |
