vs

Side-by-side financial comparison of Deckers Brands (DECK) and MAXIMUS, INC. (MMS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.

Deckers Brands is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.0B vs $1.3B, roughly 1.5× MAXIMUS, INC.). Deckers Brands runs the higher net margin — 24.6% vs 7.0%, a 17.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Deckers Brands posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (7.1% vs -4.1%). Deckers Brands produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.0B vs $-250.7M). Over the past eight quarters, Deckers Brands's revenue compounded faster (42.8% CAGR vs -0.1%).

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.

Maximus Inc. is an American government services company, with operations in countries including the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Maximus provides administration and other services for Medicaid, Medicare, health care reform, welfare-to-work, and student loan servicing, among other government programs. The company is based in Tysons, Virginia, has 39,600 employees and a reported annual revenue of $5.3 billion in fiscal year 2024.

DECK vs MMS — Head-to-Head

Bigger by revenue
DECK
DECK
1.5× larger
DECK
$2.0B
$1.3B
MMS
Growing faster (revenue YoY)
DECK
DECK
+11.2% gap
DECK
7.1%
-4.1%
MMS
Higher net margin
DECK
DECK
17.6% more per $
DECK
24.6%
7.0%
MMS
More free cash flow
DECK
DECK
$1.3B more FCF
DECK
$1.0B
$-250.7M
MMS
Faster 2-yr revenue CAGR
DECK
DECK
Annualised
DECK
42.8%
-0.1%
MMS

Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026

Metric
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Revenue
$2.0B
$1.3B
Net Profit
$481.1M
$93.9M
Gross Margin
59.8%
23.7%
Operating Margin
31.4%
10.9%
Net Margin
24.6%
7.0%
Revenue YoY
7.1%
-4.1%
Net Profit YoY
5.3%
128.0%
EPS (diluted)
$3.33
$1.70

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.

Revenue
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
$2.0B
$1.3B
Q3 25
$1.4B
$1.3B
Q2 25
$964.5M
$1.3B
Q1 25
$1.0B
$1.4B
Q4 24
$1.8B
$1.4B
Q3 24
$1.3B
$1.3B
Q2 24
$825.3M
$1.3B
Q1 24
$959.8M
$1.3B
Net Profit
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
$481.1M
$93.9M
Q3 25
$268.2M
$75.3M
Q2 25
$139.2M
$106.0M
Q1 25
$151.4M
$96.6M
Q4 24
$456.7M
$41.2M
Q3 24
$242.3M
$72.5M
Q2 24
$115.6M
$89.8M
Q1 24
$127.5M
$80.5M
Gross Margin
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
59.8%
23.7%
Q3 25
56.2%
25.3%
Q2 25
55.8%
26.7%
Q1 25
56.7%
24.9%
Q4 24
60.3%
21.5%
Q3 24
55.9%
22.9%
Q2 24
56.9%
25.3%
Q1 24
56.2%
23.6%
Operating Margin
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
31.4%
10.9%
Q3 25
22.8%
9.3%
Q2 25
17.1%
12.3%
Q1 25
17.0%
11.2%
Q4 24
31.0%
6.2%
Q3 24
23.3%
8.5%
Q2 24
16.1%
10.8%
Q1 24
15.0%
9.5%
Net Margin
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
24.6%
7.0%
Q3 25
18.7%
5.7%
Q2 25
14.4%
7.9%
Q1 25
14.8%
7.1%
Q4 24
25.0%
2.9%
Q3 24
18.5%
5.5%
Q2 24
14.0%
6.8%
Q1 24
13.3%
6.0%
EPS (diluted)
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
$3.33
$1.70
Q3 25
$1.82
$1.27
Q2 25
$0.93
$1.86
Q1 25
$-2.78
$1.69
Q4 24
$3.00
$0.69
Q3 24
$1.59
$1.18
Q2 24
$4.52
$1.46
Q1 24
$4.82
$1.31

Balance Sheet & Financial Strength

Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.

Metric
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand
$2.1B
$137.6M
Total DebtLower is stronger
Stockholders' EquityBook value
$2.6B
$1.7B
Total Assets
$4.1B
$4.2B
Debt / EquityLower = less leverage

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Cash + ST Investments
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
$2.1B
$137.6M
Q3 25
$1.4B
$222.4M
Q2 25
$1.7B
$59.8M
Q1 25
$1.9B
$108.1M
Q4 24
$2.2B
$72.7M
Q3 24
$1.2B
$183.1M
Q2 24
$1.4B
$102.8M
Q1 24
$1.5B
$77.4M
Stockholders' Equity
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
$2.6B
$1.7B
Q3 25
$2.5B
$1.7B
Q2 25
$2.5B
$1.8B
Q1 25
$2.5B
$1.7B
Q4 24
$2.6B
$1.6B
Q3 24
$2.2B
$1.8B
Q2 24
$2.1B
$1.8B
Q1 24
$2.1B
$1.8B
Total Assets
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
$4.1B
$4.2B
Q3 25
$3.8B
$4.1B
Q2 25
$3.8B
$4.5B
Q1 25
$3.6B
$4.2B
Q4 24
$4.0B
$4.1B
Q3 24
$3.4B
$4.1B
Q2 24
$3.3B
$4.0B
Q1 24
$3.1B
$4.0B

Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency

How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.

Metric
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Operating Cash FlowLast quarter
$1.0B
$-244.4M
Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex
$1.0B
$-250.7M
FCF MarginFCF / Revenue
52.1%
-18.6%
Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue
1.1%
0.5%
Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit
2.17×
-2.60×
TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters
$929.1M
$218.5M

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Operating Cash Flow
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
$1.0B
$-244.4M
Q3 25
$8.1M
$649.4M
Q2 25
$36.1M
$-182.7M
Q1 25
$-73.0M
$42.7M
Q4 24
$1.1B
$-80.0M
Q3 24
$-90.5M
$163.8M
Q2 24
$112.7M
$199.3M
Q1 24
$-28.7M
$130.5M
Free Cash Flow
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
$1.0B
$-250.7M
Q3 25
$-13.9M
$641.8M
Q2 25
$12.2M
$-198.2M
Q1 25
$-89.4M
$25.5M
Q4 24
$1.1B
$-103.0M
Q3 24
$-113.4M
$131.9M
Q2 24
$90.1M
$164.6M
Q1 24
$-44.0M
$105.2M
FCF Margin
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
52.1%
-18.6%
Q3 25
-1.0%
48.7%
Q2 25
1.3%
-14.7%
Q1 25
-8.8%
1.9%
Q4 24
58.6%
-7.3%
Q3 24
-8.6%
10.0%
Q2 24
10.9%
12.5%
Q1 24
-4.6%
7.8%
Capex Intensity
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
1.1%
0.5%
Q3 25
1.5%
0.6%
Q2 25
2.5%
1.1%
Q1 25
1.6%
1.3%
Q4 24
1.3%
1.6%
Q3 24
1.7%
2.4%
Q2 24
2.7%
2.6%
Q1 24
1.6%
1.9%
Cash Conversion
DECK
DECK
MMS
MMS
Q4 25
2.17×
-2.60×
Q3 25
0.03×
8.63×
Q2 25
0.26×
-1.72×
Q1 25
-0.48×
0.44×
Q4 24
2.40×
-1.94×
Q3 24
-0.37×
2.26×
Q2 24
0.97×
2.22×
Q1 24
-0.22×
1.62×

Financial Flow Comparison

Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.

Revenue Breakdown by Segment

DECK
DECK

UGG Brand Segment$1.3B67%
Hoka Brand Segment$628.9M32%
Other Brands Segment$23.2M1%

MMS
MMS

Clinical Services$523.7M39%
Cost Plus Contracts$386.4M29%
Outside The United States$143.2M11%
International Government Agencies$141.0M10%
Technology Solutions$74.8M6%
Employment And Other$70.2M5%
Other Including Local Municipalities And Commercial Customers$17.6M1%

Related Comparisons