vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of DT Midstream, Inc. (DTM) and OLYMPIC STEEL INC (ZEUS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
OLYMPIC STEEL INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($490.7M vs $317.0M, roughly 1.5× DT Midstream, Inc.). DT Midstream, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 35.0% vs 0.4%, a 34.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, DT Midstream, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (27.3% vs 4.4%). DT Midstream, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($30.0M vs $-12.9M). Over the past eight quarters, DT Midstream, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (14.9% CAGR vs 0.1%).
Oneok, Inc. ONE-oak, stylized as ONEOK, is an American oil and gas midstream operator headquartered in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It provides the oil and gas industry with gathering, processing, fractionation, transportation, and storage services. The company is part of the Fortune 500 and S&P 500. Oneok was founded as Oklahoma Natural Gas Company in 1906, but it changed its corporate name to Oneok in 1980.
Olympic Steel, Inc. is a metals service center based in Cleveland, Ohio. The company processes and distributes carbon, coated and stainless flat-rolled sheet, coil and plate steel, aluminium alloy, tin plate, and metal-intensive branded products primarily in the United States. Metals processing and value added services include tempering, stretch leveling, cutting-to-length, slitting, edging, shearing, blanking, burning, forming, shot blasting, laser punching, plate rolling, fabricating, machi...
DTM vs ZEUS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $317.0M | $490.7M |
| Net Profit | $111.0M | $2.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 49.2% | 1.5% |
| Net Margin | 35.0% | 0.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 27.3% | 4.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 52.1% | -21.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.07 | $0.18 |
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 | $317.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $314.0M | $490.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $309.0M | $496.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $303.0M | $492.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $249.0M | $418.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $248.0M | $470.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $244.0M | $526.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $240.0M | $526.6M |
| Q4 25 | $111.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $115.0M | $2.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $107.0M | $5.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $108.0M | $2.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $73.0M | $3.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $88.0M | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $96.0M | $7.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $97.0M | $8.7M |
| Q4 25 | 49.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 49.4% | 1.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 50.2% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 48.8% | 1.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 45.4% | 2.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 49.2% | 1.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 53.3% | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 51.7% | 3.0% |
| Q4 25 | 35.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 36.6% | 0.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 34.6% | 1.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 35.6% | 0.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 29.3% | 0.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 35.5% | 0.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.3% | 1.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 40.4% | 1.7% |
| Q4 25 | $1.07 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.13 | $0.18 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.04 | $0.45 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.06 | $0.21 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.73 | $0.33 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.90 | $0.23 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.98 | $0.66 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.99 | $0.75 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $54.0M | $7.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $240.9M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $4.7B | $579.1M |
| Total Assets | $10.1B | $1.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.42× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $54.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $98.0M | $7.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $74.0M | $14.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $83.0M | $13.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $68.0M | $11.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $77.0M | $11.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $73.0M | $9.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $41.0M | $10.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $240.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $233.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $235.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.4B | $272.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $197.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $209.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $196.8M |
| Q4 25 | $4.7B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.7B | $579.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.7B | $578.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.6B | $574.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.6B | $573.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.2B | $570.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.2B | $569.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.2B | $563.0M |
| Q4 25 | $10.1B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.0B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.9B | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.9B | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.6B | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.0B | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.0B | $1.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.42× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.41× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.72× | 0.47× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.35× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.37× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.35× |
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 | $161.0M | $-5.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $30.0M | $-12.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 9.5% | -2.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 41.3% | 1.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.45× | -2.50× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $441.0M | $41.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $161.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $274.0M | $-5.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $185.0M | $15.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $247.0M | $49.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $152.0M | $14.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $205.0M | $24.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $165.0M | $-2.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $241.0M | $-2.6M |
| Q4 25 | $30.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $131.0M | $-12.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $104.0M | $6.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $176.0M | $40.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $62.0M | $7.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $124.0M | $15.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $84.0M | $-11.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $143.0M | $-7.4M |
| Q4 25 | 9.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 41.7% | -2.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 33.7% | 1.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 58.1% | 8.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 24.9% | 1.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 50.0% | 3.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.4% | -2.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 59.6% | -1.4% |
| Q4 25 | 41.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 45.5% | 1.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.2% | 1.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 23.4% | 1.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 36.1% | 1.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 32.7% | 1.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 33.2% | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 40.8% | 0.9% |
| Q4 25 | 1.45× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.38× | -2.50× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.73× | 2.96× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.29× | 19.70× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.08× | 3.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.33× | 9.01× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.72× | -0.38× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.48× | -0.30× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
DTM
| Pipeline Segment | $173.0M | 55% |
| Gathering Segment | $144.0M | 45% |
ZEUS
| Carbon Flat Products | $268.2M | 55% |
| Specialty Metals Flat Products | $140.9M | 29% |
| Tubular And Pipe Products | $81.6M | 17% |
