vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Duolingo, Inc. (DUOL) and JACK IN THE BOX INC (JACK). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
JACK IN THE BOX INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($349.5M vs $282.9M, roughly 1.2× Duolingo, Inc.). Duolingo, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 14.8% vs -0.7%, a 15.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Duolingo, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (35.0% vs -25.5%). Duolingo, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($96.6M vs $7.3M). Over the past eight quarters, Duolingo, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (29.9% CAGR vs -18.6%).
Duolingo, Inc. is a leading global edtech firm operating a gamified language learning platform. It offers free and premium self-paced courses for over 40 languages, plus language certification, math learning tools, and literacy programs, serving individual learners, schools and corporate clients worldwide.
Jack in the Box, Inc. is an American fast food restaurant chain founded on February 21, 1951, by Robert O. Peterson in San Diego, California, where it is headquartered. The chain has over 2,200 locations, primarily serving the West Coast of the United States. Restaurants are also found in large urban areas outside the West Coast, as well as two in Guam. The company also formerly operated the Qdoba Mexican Grill chain until Apollo Global Management bought the chain in December 2017.
DUOL vs JACK — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $282.9M | $349.5M |
| Net Profit | $42.0M | $-2.5M |
| Gross Margin | 72.8% | — |
| Operating Margin | 15.4% | 13.3% |
| Net Margin | 14.8% | -0.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 35.0% | -25.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | 201.7% | -107.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.99 | $-0.13 |
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 | — | $349.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | $282.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $271.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $252.3M | $336.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $230.7M | $371.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $209.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $192.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $178.3M | $365.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | $-2.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | $42.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $292.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $44.8M | $-142.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $35.1M | $33.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $23.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $24.4M | $25.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 72.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 72.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 72.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 71.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 71.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 72.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 73.4% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | 13.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 15.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.2% | -46.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.2% | 19.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.5% | 14.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | -0.7% | ||
| Q4 25 | 14.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 107.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.8% | -42.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 15.2% | 9.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.7% | 6.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | $-0.13 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.99 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.95 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.91 | $-7.47 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.72 | $1.75 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.31 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.49 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.51 | $1.26 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.0B | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $1.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.3B | $-936.0M |
| Total Assets | $2.0B | $2.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $976.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $884.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $785.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $854.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $888.2M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.7B |
| Q1 26 | — | $-936.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $977.0M | $-976.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $893.8M | $-827.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $824.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $822.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $766.9M | $-702.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.5B | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $2.9B |
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 | $107.3M | $30.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $96.6M | $7.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 34.1% | 2.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.8% | 6.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.56× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $369.7M | $34.8M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $30.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | $107.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $84.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $90.7M | $-36.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $105.6M | $105.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $83.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $56.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $62.4M | $16.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | $7.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $96.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $79.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $89.5M | $-63.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $104.3M | $84.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $81.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $53.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $56.8M | $6.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | 2.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | 34.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 35.5% | -18.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 45.2% | 22.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 38.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 27.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 31.9% | 1.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 6.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.5% | 7.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.6% | 5.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.1% | 2.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.56× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.29× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.02× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.01× | 3.14× | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.99× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.41× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.56× | 0.67× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
DUOL
| License And Service | $242.3M | 86% |
| Advertising | $20.2M | 7% |
| English Test | $10.3M | 4% |
| Other | $10.1M | 4% |
JACK
| Restaurant Sales | $131.9M | 38% |
| Franchise | $97.4M | 28% |
| Royaltyand Other | $58.9M | 17% |
| Advertising | $56.6M | 16% |
| Technology Service | $4.7M | 1% |
| Franchise Fees | $1.7M | 0% |
