vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Deckers Brands (DECK) and KLA Corporation (KLAC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
KLA Corporation is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.3B vs $2.0B, roughly 1.7× Deckers Brands). KLA Corporation runs the higher net margin — 34.7% vs 24.6%, a 10.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, KLA Corporation posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (7.2% vs 7.1%). KLA Corporation produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.3B vs $1.0B). Over the past eight quarters, Deckers Brands's revenue compounded faster (42.8% CAGR vs 18.2%).
Deckers Outdoor Corporation, doing business as Deckers Brands, is an American footwear designer and distributor founded in 1973 and based in Goleta, California. The company's portfolio of brands includes UGG, Teva, and Hoka. It was founded by Doug Otto and Karl F. Lopker.
KLA Corporation is an American company based in Milpitas, California that makes wafer fab equipment. It supplies process control and yield management systems for the semiconductor industry and other related nanoelectronics industries. The company's products and services are intended for all phases of wafer, reticle, integrated circuit (IC) and packaging production, from research and development to final volume manufacturing.
DECK vs KLAC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q2 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.0B | $3.3B |
| Net Profit | $481.1M | $1.1B |
| Gross Margin | 59.8% | 61.4% |
| Operating Margin | 31.4% | — |
| Net Margin | 24.6% | 34.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 7.1% | 7.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | 5.3% | 39.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $3.33 | $8.68 |
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 | $2.0B | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $3.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $964.5M | $3.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $3.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.8B | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $825.3M | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $959.8M | $2.4B |
| Q4 25 | $481.1M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $268.2M | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $139.2M | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $151.4M | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $456.7M | $824.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $242.3M | $945.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $115.6M | $836.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $127.5M | $601.5M |
| Q4 25 | 59.8% | 61.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 56.2% | 61.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 55.8% | 62.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 56.7% | 61.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 60.3% | 60.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 55.9% | 59.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 56.9% | 60.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 56.2% | 57.9% |
| Q4 25 | 31.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 22.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.1% | 41.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 17.0% | 41.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 31.0% | 31.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.3% | 38.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.1% | 36.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.0% | 29.7% |
| Q4 25 | 24.6% | 34.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.7% | 34.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.4% | 37.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 14.8% | 35.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.0% | 26.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.5% | 33.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.0% | 32.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.3% | 25.5% |
| Q4 25 | $3.33 | $8.68 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.82 | $8.47 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.93 | $9.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.78 | $8.16 | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.00 | $6.16 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.59 | $7.01 | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.52 | $6.16 | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.82 | $4.43 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.1B | $2.5B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $5.9B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.6B | $5.5B |
| Total Assets | $4.1B | $16.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 1.08× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $2.1B | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.9B | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.2B | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.5B | $1.8B |
| Q4 25 | — | $5.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $5.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $5.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $5.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $5.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $5.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $5.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $5.9B |
| Q4 25 | $2.6B | $5.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5B | $5.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | $4.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.5B | $4.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.6B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.2B | $3.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.1B | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | $3.1B |
| Q4 25 | $4.1B | $16.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.8B | $16.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.8B | $16.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.6B | $15.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.0B | $15.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4B | $15.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.3B | $15.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.1B | $15.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.08× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.18× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.25× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.47× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.64× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.65× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.75× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.90× |
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 | $1.0B | $1.4B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.0B | $1.3B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 52.1% | 38.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.1% | 3.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.17× | 1.19× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $929.1M | $4.4B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.1M | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $36.1M | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $-73.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $849.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-90.5M | $995.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $112.7M | $892.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-28.7M | $910.0M |
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $-13.9M | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.2M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $-89.4M | $990.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $757.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-113.4M | $934.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $90.1M | $831.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-44.0M | $838.2M |
| Q4 25 | 52.1% | 38.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.0% | 33.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 33.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -8.8% | 32.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 58.6% | 24.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -8.6% | 32.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.9% | 32.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -4.6% | 35.5% |
| Q4 25 | 1.1% | 3.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.5% | 3.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.5% | 3.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.6% | 2.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.3% | 3.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.7% | 2.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.7% | 2.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.6% | 3.0% |
| Q4 25 | 2.17× | 1.19× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.03× | 1.04× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.26× | 0.97× | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.48× | 0.99× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.40× | 1.03× | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.37× | 1.05× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.97× | 1.07× | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.22× | 1.51× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
DECK
| UGG Brand Segment | $1.3B | 67% |
| Hoka Brand Segment | $628.9M | 32% |
| Other Brands Segment | $23.2M | 1% |
KLAC
| Wafer Inspection | $1.6B | 48% |
| Services | $786.1M | 24% |
| Patterning | $696.2M | 21% |
| Specialty Semiconductor Process | $121.6M | 4% |
| PCB And Component Inspection | $80.3M | 2% |
| Other Revenue | $40.2M | 1% |
