vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Dime Community Bancshares, Inc. (DCOM) and LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP (LSCC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($145.8M vs $123.8M, roughly 1.2× Dime Community Bancshares, Inc.). On growth, Dime Community Bancshares, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (3040.1% vs 9.3%). Over the past eight quarters, Dime Community Bancshares, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (22.9% CAGR vs 8.4%).
The Dime Community Bank, originally known as the Dime Savings Bank of Williamsburgh, is a local, FDIC-insured bank headquartered in Hauppauge, New York. Founded in 1864, the bank was originally based in the Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York, and continues to operate with a strong market presence in this area. In 2017, Dime moved its headquarters to Brooklyn Heights. On Monday, February 1, 2021, Bridge Bancorp Inc. and Dime Community Bancshares successfully closed on a merger of ...
Lattice Semiconductor Corporation is an American semiconductor company specializing in the design and manufacturing of low power field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). Headquartered in the Silicon Forest area of Hillsboro, Oregon, the company also has operations in San Jose, Calif., Shanghai, Manila, Penang, and Singapore. Lattice Semiconductor has more than 1000 employees and an annual revenue of more than $660 million as of 2022. The company was founded in 1983 and went public in 1989. It ...
DCOM vs LSCC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $123.8M | $145.8M |
| Net Profit | — | $-7.6M |
| Gross Margin | — | 68.5% |
| Operating Margin | 38.6% | 30.7% |
| Net Margin | — | -5.2% |
| Revenue YoY | 3040.1% | 9.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 14.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.68 | $-0.06 |
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 | — | $145.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $123.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $115.6M | $133.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $109.7M | $124.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $103.8M | $120.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.9M | $117.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $87.6M | $127.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $87.3M | $124.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | $-7.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $27.7M | $2.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $29.7M | $2.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.5M | $5.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $16.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.3M | $7.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.5M | $22.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | 68.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 67.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 68.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 68.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 61.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 69.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 68.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q4 25 | 38.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.7% | -1.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 36.6% | 3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 27.6% | 5.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -433.6% | -10.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.8% | 5.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 29.8% | 18.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | -5.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 23.9% | 2.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 27.1% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.7% | 4.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 14.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.2% | 5.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.2% | 18.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | $-0.06 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.68 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.59 | $0.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.64 | $0.02 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.45 | $0.04 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.58 | $0.12 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.29 | $0.05 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.43 | $0.16 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $133.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.5B | $714.1M |
| Total Assets | $15.3B | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $133.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $117.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $107.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $127.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $136.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $124.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $109.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | $714.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $706.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $687.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $707.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $710.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $703.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $698.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | $883.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $15.3B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.5B | $844.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.2B | $808.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $14.1B | $823.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.4B | $843.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.7B | $853.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.5B | $827.5M |
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 | $186.6M | $57.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $44.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 30.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $153.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $57.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $186.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $52.1M | $47.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.1M | $38.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $65.4M | $31.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $99.1M | $45.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-33.3M | $44.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.6M | $21.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | $44.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $51.2M | $34.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $20.4M | $31.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $23.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $39.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-34.1M | $39.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.2M | $14.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | 30.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 44.3% | 25.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.6% | 25.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 19.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 33.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -38.9% | 31.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.5% | 11.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.7% | 9.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.4% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 4.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.9% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.9% | 5.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.88× | 16.86× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.78× | 13.23× | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.05× | 6.35× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.50× | 6.12× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.68× | 0.97× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
