vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Centuri Holdings, Inc. (CTRI) and Garrett Motion Inc. (GTX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Garrett Motion Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($985.0M vs $858.6M, roughly 1.1× Centuri Holdings, Inc.). Garrett Motion Inc. runs the higher net margin — 9.6% vs 3.5%, a 6.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Centuri Holdings, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (19.7% vs 12.2%). Centuri Holdings, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($66.3M vs $49.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Centuri Holdings, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (27.5% CAGR vs 5.2%).
Centuri, formerly known as Allied Leisure, was an American arcade game manufacturer. They were based in Hialeah, Florida, and were one of the top six suppliers of coin-operated arcade video game machinery in the United States during the early 1980s. Centuri in its modern inception was formed when former Taito America president Ed Miller and his partner Bill Olliges took over Allied Leisure, Inc. They renamed it "Centuri" in 1980. The company's vice president was Joel Hochberg from about 1976 ...
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 ...
CTRI vs GTX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $858.6M | $985.0M |
| Net Profit | $30.4M | $95.0M |
| Gross Margin | 9.4% | 19.9% |
| Operating Margin | 4.3% | — |
| Net Margin | 3.5% | 9.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 19.7% | 12.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | 194.1% | 53.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.34 | — |
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 | — | $985.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $858.6M | $891.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $850.0M | $902.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $724.1M | $913.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $550.1M | $878.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $717.1M | $844.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $720.1M | $826.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $672.1M | $890.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $95.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $30.4M | $84.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.1M | $77.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.1M | $87.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-17.9M | $62.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.3M | $100.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-3.7M | $52.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.7M | $64.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 19.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | 9.4% | 20.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.2% | 20.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.4% | 19.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.7% | 20.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.9% | 21.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.5% | 20.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.0% | 20.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.3% | 11.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.3% | 11.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.4% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.3% | 9.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.7% | 11.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.8% | 9.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.9% | 9.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 9.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.5% | 9.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.2% | 8.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.1% | 9.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -3.3% | 7.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.4% | 11.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.5% | 6.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.7% | 7.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.34 | $0.42 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.02 | $0.38 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.09 | $0.42 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.20 | $0.30 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.17 | $0.46 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.04 | $0.24 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.14 | $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 | $126.6M | $142.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $1.4B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $873.0M | — |
| Total Assets | $2.4B | $2.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $142.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $126.6M | $177.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.1M | $230.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $28.3M | $232.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $15.3M | $130.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $49.0M | $125.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $52.5M | $96.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $30.9M | $98.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $873.0M | $-802.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $585.2M | $-813.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $567.1M | $-812.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.5M | $-700.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $555.6M | $-673.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $527.3M | $-778.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $530.4M | $-725.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.4B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1B | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.0B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.1B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.1B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2B | $2.2B |
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 | $83.9M | $98.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $66.3M | $49.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 7.7% | 5.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.76× | 1.03× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.2M | $360.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $98.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $83.9M | $99.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.2M | $100.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-27.7M | $158.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $16.7M | $56.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $61.0M | $131.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $180.2M | $67.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-56.6M | $126.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $49.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $66.3M | $78.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-18.4M | $90.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-48.5M | $143.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.7M | $30.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $27.8M | $109.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $160.7M | $47.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-76.9M | $109.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 5.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.7% | 8.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.2% | 10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | 15.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.4% | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.9% | 12.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.3% | 5.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -11.4% | 12.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.0% | 2.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.8% | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.9% | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.4% | 3.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.6% | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.7% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.0% | 1.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | 1.03× | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.76× | 1.18× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.48× | 1.30× | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.43× | 1.82× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.90× | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.90× | 1.31× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.29× | ||
| Q2 24 | -4.84× | 1.97× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CTRI
| Master Services Agreement | $660.7M | 77% |
| Non Union Electric Segment | $163.4M | 19% |
| Related Party | $25.6M | 3% |
GTX
Segment breakdown not available.
