vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Crane NXT, Co. (CXT) and Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Crane NXT, Co. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($387.7M vs $211.6M, roughly 1.8× Texas Pacific Land Corporation). Texas Pacific Land Corporation runs the higher net margin — 58.3% vs 1.7%, a 56.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Crane NXT, Co. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (17.4% vs 13.9%). Over the past eight quarters, Texas Pacific Land Corporation's revenue compounded faster (10.2% CAGR vs 2.3%).
Crane Co. is an American industrial products company based in Stamford, Connecticut. Founded by Richard Teller Crane in 1855, it became one of the leading manufacturers of bathroom fixtures in the United States, until 1990, when that division was sold off. In 1960 it began the process of becoming a holding company with a diverse portfolio. Its business segments are Aerospace & Electronics, Engineered Materials, Fluid Handling, and Controls. Industries served by these segments include chemical...
The Texas Pacific Land Corporation is a publicly traded real estate operating company with its administrative office in Dallas, Texas. Owning over 880,000 acres (3,600 km2) in 20 West Texas counties, TPL is among the largest private landowners in the state of Texas. It was previously organized as a publicly traded trust taxed as a corporation, and operated under the name Texas Pacific Land Trust.
CXT vs TPL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $387.7M | $211.6M |
| Net Profit | $6.4M | $123.3M |
| Gross Margin | 40.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 70.5% |
| Net Margin | 1.7% | 58.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 17.4% | 13.9% |
| Net Profit YoY | -70.5% | 4.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-8.59 |
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 | $387.7M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $476.9M | $211.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $445.1M | $203.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $404.4M | $187.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $330.3M | $196.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $399.1M | $185.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $403.5M | $173.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $370.6M | $172.3M |
| Q1 26 | $6.4M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $47.5M | $123.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $50.5M | $121.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $24.9M | $116.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.7M | $120.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $118.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $47.1M | $106.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $41.6M | $114.6M |
| Q1 26 | 40.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 42.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 43.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 41.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 42.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 45.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 42.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 43.4% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 16.7% | 70.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.4% | 73.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.8% | 76.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 11.3% | 76.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.7% | 76.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.6% | 73.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.2% | 77.3% |
| Q1 26 | 1.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 10.0% | 58.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.3% | 59.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.2% | 61.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.6% | 61.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 63.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.7% | 61.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.2% | 66.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.82 | $-8.59 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.87 | $5.27 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.43 | $5.05 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.38 | $5.24 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.00 | $5.14 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.81 | $4.63 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.72 | $4.98 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $228.3M | $144.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.5B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.2B | $1.5B |
| Total Assets | $3.6B | $1.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.22× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $228.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $233.8M | $144.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $182.4M | $531.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $152.5M | $543.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $173.8M | $460.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $165.8M | $369.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $165.1M | $533.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $175.5M | $894.7M |
| Q1 26 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $834.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $861.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $541.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $540.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $638.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $638.9M | — |
| Q1 26 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $989.8M | $1.2B |
| Q1 26 | $3.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.1B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.4B | $1.3B |
| Q1 26 | 1.22× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.80× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.69× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.73× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.49× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.51× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.60× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.65× | — |
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 | — | $113.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-24.1M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -6.2% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.6% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 0.92× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $105.8M | $113.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $92.0M | $154.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.8M | $120.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-19.1M | $156.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $81.1M | $126.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $66.7M | $118.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $56.8M | $98.3M |
| Q1 26 | $-24.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $78.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $55.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-32.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $53.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $47.9M | — |
| Q1 26 | -6.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -9.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | 2.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.4% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.23× | 0.92× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.82× | 1.28× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.52× | 1.04× | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.88× | 1.30× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.07× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.42× | 1.11× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.37× | 0.86× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CXT
| Detection and Traceability Technologies | $194.9M | 50% |
| Security and Authentication Technologies | $192.8M | 50% |
TPL
| Water Serviceand Operations Segment | $98.2M | 46% |
| Water Sales And Royalties | $60.7M | 29% |
| Produced Water Royalties | $33.5M | 16% |
| Easementand Sundry | $20.6M | 10% |
