vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CARLISLE COMPANIES INC (CSL) and Garrett Motion Inc. (GTX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
CARLISLE COMPANIES INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.1B vs $985.0M, roughly 1.1× Garrett Motion Inc.). CARLISLE COMPANIES INC runs the higher net margin — 12.1% vs 9.6%, a 2.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Garrett Motion Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (12.2% vs -4.0%). Garrett Motion Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($49.0M vs $-73.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Garrett Motion Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (5.2% CAGR vs -14.8%).
Carlisle Companies Incorporated is a supplier of construction products that make buildings more energy efficient and resilient. The company manufactures and sells single-ply roofing products as well as warranted systems and accessories for the commercial building industry. The company is organized into two segments, including Carlisle Construction Materials and Carlisle Weatherproofing Technologies. The company's product portfolio includes moisture protection products, protective roofing unde...
Garrett Motion Inc., formerly Honeywell Transportation Systems and Honeywell Turbo Technologies, is an American company primarily involved in engineering, development and manufacturing of turbochargers and related forced induction systems for ground vehicles from small passenger cars to large trucks and industrial equipment and construction machinery. It originated as part of Garrett AiResearch's Industrial Division in Phoenix, Arizona, in 1954, after which they entered a contract to provide ...
CSL vs GTX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.1B | $985.0M |
| Net Profit | $127.7M | $95.0M |
| Gross Margin | 34.5% | 19.9% |
| Operating Margin | 17.1% | — |
| Net Margin | 12.1% | 9.6% |
| Revenue YoY | -4.0% | 12.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -10.9% | 53.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $3.10 | — |
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 | $1.1B | $985.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $891.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $902.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $913.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $878.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $844.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $826.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $890.0M |
| Q1 26 | $127.7M | $95.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $127.4M | $84.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $214.2M | $77.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $255.8M | $87.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $143.3M | $62.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $162.8M | $100.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $244.3M | $52.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $712.4M | $64.0M |
| Q1 26 | 34.5% | 19.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | 33.8% | 20.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 36.0% | 20.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 37.3% | 19.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 35.2% | 20.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 36.1% | 21.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 38.6% | 20.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.2% | 20.8% |
| Q1 26 | 17.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 16.8% | 11.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.8% | 11.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.1% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 16.8% | 9.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.9% | 11.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.7% | 9.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 26.0% | 9.8% |
| Q1 26 | 12.1% | 9.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | 11.3% | 9.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.9% | 8.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.6% | 9.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.1% | 7.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.5% | 11.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.3% | 6.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 49.1% | 7.2% |
| Q1 26 | $3.10 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.06 | $0.42 | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.98 | $0.38 | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.88 | $0.42 | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.20 | $0.30 | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.76 | $0.46 | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.25 | $0.24 | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.84 | $0.28 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $771.3M | $142.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $1.4B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.7B | — |
| Total Assets | — | $2.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $771.3M | $142.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $177.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $230.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $68.4M | $232.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $220.2M | $130.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $753.5M | $125.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $96.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | $98.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.3B | — |
| Q1 26 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.8B | $-802.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $-813.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1B | $-812.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.2B | $-700.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.5B | $-673.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8B | $-778.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.0B | $-725.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.3B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.5B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.5B | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.5B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.8B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.5B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.7B | $2.2B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.61× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.45× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.89× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.87× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.77× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.83× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.76× | — |
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 | — | $98.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-73.0M | $49.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -6.9% | 5.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.03× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $924.8M | $360.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $98.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $386.0M | $99.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $426.9M | $100.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $287.1M | $158.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8M | $56.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $370.6M | $131.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $312.8M | $67.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $183.4M | $126.0M |
| Q1 26 | $-73.0M | $49.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $346.1M | $78.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $393.4M | $90.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $258.3M | $143.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-27.2M | $30.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $334.0M | $109.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $293.5M | $47.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $158.5M | $109.0M |
| Q1 26 | -6.9% | 5.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 30.7% | 8.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.2% | 10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.8% | 15.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.5% | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 29.7% | 12.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.0% | 5.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.9% | 12.2% |
| Q1 26 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.5% | 2.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.5% | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.0% | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.6% | 3.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.4% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.7% | 1.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | 1.03× | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.03× | 1.18× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.99× | 1.30× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.12× | 1.82× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.01× | 0.90× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.28× | 1.31× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.28× | 1.29× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.26× | 1.97× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CSL
| CCM | $758.0M | 72% |
| CWT | $294.0M | 28% |
GTX
Segment breakdown not available.
