vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE GROUP (CWT) and SEMrush Holdings, Inc. (SEMR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE GROUP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($210.7M vs $117.7M, roughly 1.8× SEMrush Holdings, Inc.). CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE GROUP runs the higher net margin — 5.4% vs -9.4%, a 14.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, SEMrush Holdings, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (14.6% vs -3.3%). Over the past eight quarters, SEMrush Holdings, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (17.1% CAGR vs 16.6%).
California Water Service Group (CWSG) is an American public utility company providing drinking water and wastewater services. It is the third-largest investor-owned publicly traded water utility in the United States, serving roughly two million people through its subsidiary companies in California, Hawaii, New Mexico and Washington. CWSG was formed in 1997 as a new holding company for California Water Service to expand into other states regulated by their own public utilities commissions, and...
Semrush Holdings, Inc. is an American public company that has a SaaS platform known as Semrush. The platform is used for keyword research, competitive analysis, site audits, backlink tracking, domain authority tracking, and online visibility insights. The keyword research tool provides various data points on each keyword. The platform also collects information about online keywords gathered from Google and Bing search engines. It was released by Boston-based company Semrush Inc, founded by Ol...
CWT vs SEMR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $210.7M | $117.7M |
| Net Profit | $11.5M | $-11.1M |
| Gross Margin | — | 80.4% |
| Operating Margin | 12.2% | -11.8% |
| Net Margin | 5.4% | -9.4% |
| Revenue YoY | -3.3% | 14.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | -41.0% | -431.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.19 | $-0.09 |
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 | $210.7M | $117.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $314.1M | $112.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $256.2M | $108.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $182.7M | $105.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $217.8M | $102.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $306.2M | $97.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $226.7M | $91.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $154.9M | $85.8M |
| Q4 25 | $11.5M | $-11.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $61.2M | $-2.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $42.2M | $-6.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.3M | $849.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.5M | $3.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $60.7M | $1.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $40.6M | $1.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $69.9M | $2.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | 80.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 80.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 80.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 81.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 81.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 82.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 83.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 82.9% |
| Q4 25 | 12.2% | -11.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 22.5% | -4.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.2% | -4.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.2% | -0.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.8% | 1.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 21.8% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.2% | 3.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 50.3% | 1.7% |
| Q4 25 | 5.4% | -9.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.5% | -1.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 16.5% | -6.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.3% | 0.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.9% | 3.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.8% | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 17.9% | 1.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 45.1% | 2.5% |
| Q4 25 | $0.19 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.03 | $-0.01 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.71 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.22 | $0.01 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.31 | $0.03 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.03 | $0.01 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.70 | $0.01 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.21 | $0.01 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $51.8M | $264.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.5B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.7B | $288.6M |
| Total Assets | $5.7B | $454.1M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.87× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $51.8M | $264.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $76.0M | $80.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $50.5M | $54.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $44.5M | $64.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $50.1M | $48.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $59.6M | $45.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $37.3M | $69.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $42.8M | $41.4M |
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | $288.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $289.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $279.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | $268.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $256.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | $248.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $235.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.5B | $226.0M |
| Q4 25 | $5.7B | $454.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.5B | $450.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.4B | $424.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.3B | $416.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.2B | $390.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.0B | $383.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.9B | $372.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.8B | $341.7M |
| Q4 25 | 0.87× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.65× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.67× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.68× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.67× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $47.9M | $14.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $14.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 12.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 4.17× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $57.8M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $47.9M | $14.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $167.3M | $21.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $48.9M | $684.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $38.4M | $22.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $68.1M | $11.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $101.8M | $8.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $94.4M | $12.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $26.5M | $14.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $14.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $21.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $80.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $21.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $11.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $7.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $10.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $14.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 12.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 19.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 20.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 11.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 7.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 11.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 16.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.9% |
| Q4 25 | 4.17× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.73× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.16× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.88× | 26.04× | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.50× | 3.57× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.68× | 7.44× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.33× | 7.32× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.38× | 6.91× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CWT
| Residential | $133.2M | 63% |
| Business | $47.7M | 23% |
| Public Authorities | $13.4M | 6% |
| Industrial | $6.9M | 3% |
| Non Regulated Services | $4.8M | 2% |
| Other Non Regulated Service | $1.2M | 1% |
SEMR
Segment breakdown not available.
