vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Commercial Vehicle Group, Inc. (CVGI) and LEAR CORP (LEA), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LEAR CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($6.0B vs $154.8M, roughly 38.7× Commercial Vehicle Group, Inc.). On growth, LEAR CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.8% vs -5.2%). LEAR CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($281.1M vs $8.7M). Over the past eight quarters, LEAR CORP's revenue compounded faster (-0.1% CAGR vs -10.8%).
WABCO Holdings, Inc. was a U.S.-based provider of electronic braking, stability, suspension and transmission automation systems for heavy-duty commercial vehicles. In 2007, the Vehicle Control Systems was spun off as WABCO Holdings Inc., an American provider of electronic braking, stability, suspension and transmission automation systems for heavy-duty commercial vehicles. Their products are present in many commercial vehicles such as trucks, buses, trailers and off-highway vehicles but they ...
Lear Corporation is an American company that manufactures automotive seating and electrical systems. In 2019, it ranked #147 and in 2018, it ranked #148 on the Fortune 500 list.
CVGI vs LEA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $154.8M | $6.0B |
| Net Profit | — | $82.7M |
| Gross Margin | 9.7% | 5.7% |
| Operating Margin | -1.2% | 2.6% |
| Net Margin | — | 1.4% |
| Revenue YoY | -5.2% | 4.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -6.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $1.58 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $154.8M | $6.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $152.5M | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $172.0M | $6.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $169.8M | $5.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $163.3M | $5.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $171.8M | $5.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $193.7M | $6.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $194.6M | $6.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | $82.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-7.1M | $108.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-4.8M | $165.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-4.3M | $80.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $88.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.5M | $135.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.6M | $173.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.9M | $109.6M |
| Q4 25 | 9.7% | 5.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.5% | 6.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.4% | 7.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.5% | 6.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.0% | 6.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.6% | 7.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.6% | 7.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 11.9% | 6.6% |
| Q4 25 | -1.2% | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -0.7% | 3.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.5% | 4.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.8% | 3.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.2% | 3.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.6% | 3.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.5% | 4.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.3% | 3.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | -4.6% | 1.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.8% | 2.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.5% | 1.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.5% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.8% | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | 1.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.58 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $3.06 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.49 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.64 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.41 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.05 | $3.02 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.09 | $1.90 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $1.0B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $104.9M | $2.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $133.4M | $5.0B |
| Total Assets | $391.7M | $14.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.79× | 0.54× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $887.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $779.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $763.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $950.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $930.4M |
| Q4 25 | $104.9M | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $108.2M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $118.2M | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $117.4M | $2.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $135.5M | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $128.8M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $142.0M | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $155.7M | $2.7B |
| Q4 25 | $133.4M | $5.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $136.5M | $5.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $142.6M | $5.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $136.7M | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $135.6M | $4.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $179.3M | $4.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $169.6M | $4.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $175.5M | $4.9B |
| Q4 25 | $391.7M | $14.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $400.3M | $15.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $429.8M | $15.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $419.8M | $14.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $424.6M | $14.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $495.3M | $14.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $503.2M | $14.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $509.2M | $14.9B |
| Q4 25 | 0.79× | 0.54× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.79× | 0.54× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.83× | 0.54× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.86× | 0.59× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.00× | 0.61× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.72× | 0.58× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.84× | 0.57× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.89× | 0.56× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $12.3M | $475.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $8.7M | $281.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 5.6% | 4.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 2.3% | 3.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | 5.75× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $34.0M | $527.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $12.3M | $475.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.7M | $444.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.9M | $296.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $15.2M | $-127.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-26.6M | $680.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-17.1M | $182.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.6M | $291.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.4M | $-34.6M |
| Q4 25 | $8.7M | $281.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-3.5M | $307.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.4M | $170.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.4M | $-231.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-30.6M | $488.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-20.3M | $50.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.4M | $170.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-7.4M | $-148.2M |
| Q4 25 | 5.6% | 4.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.3% | 5.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.1% | 2.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.7% | -4.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -18.7% | 8.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -11.8% | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.3% | 2.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | -3.8% | -2.5% |
| Q4 25 | 2.3% | 3.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.2% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.9% | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 1.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.4% | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.9% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.2% | 2.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.6% | 1.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.75× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.11× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.79× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -1.58× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.73× | ||
| Q3 24 | -1.79× | 1.35× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.68× | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.80× | -0.32× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CVGI
| Global Seating | $70.7M | 46% |
| Global Electrical Systems | $49.7M | 32% |
| Trim Systems And Components | $34.4M | 22% |
LEA
| Other | $3.5B | 59% |
| Seating Segment | $1.9B | 32% |
| E Systems Segment | $520.6M | 9% |
