vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Centuri Holdings, Inc. (CTRI) and Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd. (MAXN). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Centuri Holdings, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($858.6M vs $509.0M, roughly 1.7× Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd.). Centuri Holdings, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 3.5% vs -120.7%, a 124.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Centuri Holdings, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (19.7% vs -54.7%). Centuri Holdings, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($66.3M vs $-322.3M).
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 ...
Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd. is a Singapore-based company that designs and manufactures photovoltaic panels. The company was previously a division of the American company SunPower. Maxeon was spun off from SunPower in August 2020. Maxeon was the primary provider of solar panels for SunPower through March 2024. Beyond the United States, Maxeon has sales operations in more than 100 countries and has the rights to use the SunPower brand in countries outside the United States.
CTRI vs MAXN — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $858.6M | $509.0M |
| Net Profit | $30.4M | $-614.3M |
| Gross Margin | 9.4% | — |
| Operating Margin | 4.3% | -113.3% |
| Net Margin | 3.5% | -120.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 19.7% | -54.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 194.1% | -122.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.34 | $-96.00 |
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 | $858.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $850.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $724.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $550.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $717.1M | $509.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $720.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $672.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $528.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | $30.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-17.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.3M | $-614.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-3.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-25.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | 9.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 4.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.7% | -113.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -4.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | 3.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -3.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.4% | -120.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.7% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -4.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | $0.34 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.02 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.09 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.20 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.17 | $-96.00 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.04 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.14 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.35 | — |
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 | $28.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $873.0M | $-293.8M |
| Total Assets | $2.4B | $376.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $126.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $28.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $15.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $49.0M | $28.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $52.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $30.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $18.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | $873.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $585.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $567.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $536.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $555.6M | $-293.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $527.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $530.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $197.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | $2.4B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.0B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.1B | $376.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.1B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | — |
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 | $-270.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $66.3M | $-322.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 7.7% | -63.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.0% | 10.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.76× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.2M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $83.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-27.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $16.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $61.0M | $-270.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $180.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-56.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-26.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | $66.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-18.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-48.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $27.8M | $-322.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $160.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-76.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-52.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.9% | -63.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -11.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -10.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | 2.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.6% | 10.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | 2.76× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.48× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.43× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.90× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -4.84× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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% |
MAXN
Segment breakdown not available.
