vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Danaher Corporation (DHR) and GE Vernova (GEV). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
GE Vernova is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($9.3B vs $6.0B, roughly 1.6× Danaher Corporation). GE Vernova runs the higher net margin — 50.9% vs 17.3%, a 33.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, GE Vernova posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (16.3% vs 3.7%). Over the past eight quarters, GE Vernova's revenue compounded faster (6.7% CAGR vs 1.8%).
Danaher CorporationDHREarnings & Financial Report
Danaher Corporation is an American healthcare company headquartered in Washington, D.C.. It develops products used for advances in biotechnology, life sciences, and diagnostics. The company operates three divisions: biotechnology, which develops products for the development of therapeutics; life sciences, which develops products to identify causes of disease, new therapies, and to test and manufacture new drugs, vaccines and gene editing technologies; and diagnostics, which develops instruments,...
GE Vernova, Inc. is an energy equipment manufacturing and services company headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The company operates through three main segments: Power, which designs, manufactures, and services gas, nuclear, hydro, and steam technologies; Wind, which provides onshore and offshore wind turbines and blades; and Electrification, which offers grid solutions, power conversion, solar and storage solutions, and digital technologies for the transmission, distribution, and manag...
DHR vs GEV — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $6.0B | $9.3B |
| Net Profit | $1.0B | $4.8B |
| Gross Margin | 60.3% | — |
| Operating Margin | 22.6% | — |
| Net Margin | 17.3% | 50.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 3.7% | 16.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 7.9% | 5.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.45 | $17.44 |
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 | $6.0B | $9.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.8B | $11.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.1B | $10.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.9B | $9.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.7B | $8.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.5B | $10.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.8B | $8.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.7B | $8.2B |
| Q1 26 | $1.0B | $4.8B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $908.0M | $452.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $555.0M | $514.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $954.0M | $254.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $484.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $818.0M | $-96.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $907.0M | $1.3B |
| Q1 26 | 60.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 58.0% | 21.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 58.2% | 19.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 59.3% | 20.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 61.2% | 18.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 59.5% | 20.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 58.7% | 12.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 59.7% | 20.7% |
| Q1 26 | 22.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 22.0% | 5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.1% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.8% | 4.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 22.2% | 0.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.8% | 5.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.5% | -4.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 20.3% | 6.4% |
| Q1 26 | 17.3% | 50.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.5% | 33.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.0% | 4.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 16.6% | 3.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.6% | 4.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.1% | -1.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.8% | 15.8% |
| Q1 26 | $1.45 | $17.44 | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.69 | $13.28 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.27 | $1.64 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.77 | $1.86 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.32 | $0.91 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.50 | $1.75 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.12 | $-0.35 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.22 | $4.65 |
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 | $1.3B | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $4.8B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 51.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 4.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.28× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $7.5B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.1B | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $980.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $367.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.0B | $921.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $979.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $4.8B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $733.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $194.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $975.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5B | $571.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $968.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $822.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 51.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 25.5% | 16.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 22.6% | 7.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.4% | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.4% | 12.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 23.0% | 5.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 21.0% | 10.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.7% | 10.0% |
| Q1 26 | 4.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.4% | 6.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.8% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.2% | 1.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | 2.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.9% | 3.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.1% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.0% | 1.9% |
| Q1 26 | 1.28× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.77× | 0.68× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.83× | 2.17× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.41× | 0.71× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.36× | 4.57× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.86× | 1.90× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.85× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.56× | 0.76× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
