vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Duke Energy (DUK) and Evergy (EVRG), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Duke Energy is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($7.8B vs $1.3B, roughly 6.0× Evergy). Duke Energy runs the higher net margin — 15.2% vs 6.5%, a 8.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Duke Energy posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (7.4% vs 5.3%). Duke Energy produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-485.0M vs $-530.5M). Over the past eight quarters, Duke Energy's revenue compounded faster (1.6% CAGR vs 0.4%).
Duke Energy Corporation is an American electric power and natural gas holding company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. The company serves over 7 million customers in the eastern United States. In 2024 it ranked as the 141st largest company in the United States – its highest-ever placement on the Fortune 500 list.
Evergy, Inc. is an American investor-owned utility (IOU) with publicly traded stock with headquarters in Topeka, Kansas, and in Kansas City, Missouri. The company was formed from a merger of Westar Energy of Topeka and Great Plains Energy of Kansas City, parent company of Kansas City Power & Light. Evergy is the largest electric company in Kansas, serving more than 1.7 million residential, commercial and industrial customers in Kansas and Missouri.
DUK vs EVRG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $7.8B | $1.3B |
| Net Profit | $1.2B | $84.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 27.3% | 18.5% |
| Net Margin | 15.2% | 6.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 7.4% | 5.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1.7% | 7.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.49 | $0.35 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $7.8B | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.4B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.4B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $8.2B | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.1B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.2B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.5B | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $84.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $475.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $984.0M | $171.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $125.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $78.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $465.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $900.0M | $207.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | $122.7M |
| Q4 25 | 27.3% | 18.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 27.9% | 37.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.8% | 25.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 28.5% | 22.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 29.2% | 18.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.4% | 35.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.9% | 25.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 26.1% | 20.3% |
| Q4 25 | 15.2% | 6.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.0% | 26.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.3% | 12.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 16.8% | 9.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.6% | 6.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.8% | 26.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.6% | 14.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.1% | 9.6% |
| Q4 25 | $1.49 | $0.35 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.81 | $2.03 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.25 | $0.74 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.76 | $0.54 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.54 | $0.34 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.60 | $2.02 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.13 | $0.90 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.44 | $0.53 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $245.0M | $19.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $80.1B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $51.8B | $10.2B |
| Total Assets | $195.7B | $33.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.55× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $245.0M | $19.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $688.0M | $27.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $344.0M | $27.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $475.0M | $35.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $314.0M | $22.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $376.0M | $34.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $390.0M | $26.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $459.0M | $63.7M |
| Q4 25 | $80.1B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $76.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $51.8B | $10.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $51.5B | $10.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $50.9B | $10.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $50.7B | $9.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $50.1B | $10.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $49.1B | $10.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $49.7B | $9.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $49.6B | $9.6B |
| Q4 25 | $195.7B | $33.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $192.3B | $33.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $189.7B | $32.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $187.5B | $32.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $186.3B | $32.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $183.6B | $32.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $181.6B | $31.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $178.7B | $31.3B |
| Q4 25 | 1.55× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.52× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $3.7B | $334.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-485.0M | $-530.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -6.2% | -41.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 53.3% | 66.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 3.09× | 3.96× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-1.7B | $-751.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $3.7B | $334.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.6B | $937.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9B | $323.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.2B | $449.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.4B | $395.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.5B | $953.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.0B | $317.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.5B | $317.3M |
| Q4 25 | $-485.0M | $-530.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $179.0M | $225.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-417.0M | $-303.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-971.0M | $-143.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $288.0M | $-118.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $537.0M | $427.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-43.0M | $-360.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-734.0M | $-301.3M |
| Q4 25 | -6.2% | -41.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.1% | 12.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -5.7% | -22.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -11.8% | -11.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.0% | -9.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.6% | 23.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.6% | -25.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -9.7% | -23.5% |
| Q4 25 | 53.3% | 66.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 41.2% | 40.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 44.5% | 46.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 38.3% | 45.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 42.7% | 41.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 36.8% | 29.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 41.9% | 48.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 42.6% | 48.3% |
| Q4 25 | 3.09× | 3.96× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.56× | 1.97× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.91× | 1.89× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.58× | 3.60× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.80× | 5.06× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.75× | 2.05× | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.28× | 1.53× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.17× | 2.59× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
DUK
| Electric Utilitiesand Infrastructure | $7.0B | 90% |
| Other Revenues | $741.0M | 10% |
EVRG
| Electric Utility Customer Class Residential | $462.9M | 36% |
| Electric Utility Customer Class Commercial | $447.6M | 35% |
| Electric Utility Customer Class Industrial | $164.1M | 13% |
| Electric Utility Customer Class Transmission | $129.4M | 10% |
| Electric Utility Customer Class Wholesale | $69.7M | 5% |
| Electric Utility Customer Class Other Retail | $12.2M | 1% |
| Electric Utility Customer Class Industrial Steam | $5.7M | 0% |
