vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ENBRIDGE INC (ENB) and Lam Research (LRCX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ENBRIDGE INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($5.7B vs $5.3B, roughly 1.1× Lam Research). Lam Research runs the higher net margin — 29.8% vs 26.2%, a 3.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Lam Research posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (22.1% vs 5.3%). ENBRIDGE INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($2.4B vs $1.2B). Over the past eight quarters, Lam Research's revenue compounded faster (18.7% CAGR vs 7.6%).
Enbridge Inc. is a multinational pipeline and energy company headquartered in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Enbridge owns and operates pipelines throughout Canada and the United States, transporting crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids, and also generates renewable energy. Enbridge's pipeline system is the longest in North America and the largest oil export pipeline network in the world. Its crude oil system consists of 28,661 kilometres of pipelines. Its 38,300 kilometre natural gas p...
Lam Research Corporation is an American supplier of wafer-fabrication equipment and related services to the semiconductor industry. Its products are used primarily in front-end wafer processing, which involves the steps that create the active components of semiconductor devices and their wiring (interconnects). The company also builds equipment for back-end wafer-level packaging (WLP) and for related manufacturing markets such as for microelectromechanical systems (MEMS).
ENB vs LRCX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $5.7B | $5.3B |
| Net Profit | $1.5B | $1.6B |
| Gross Margin | — | 49.6% |
| Operating Margin | 34.7% | 33.9% |
| Net Margin | 26.2% | 29.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 5.3% | 22.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 246.2% | 33.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $1.26 |
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 | $5.7B | $5.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.5B | $5.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.8B | $5.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.4B | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.4B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.2B | $4.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.3B | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.9B | $3.8B |
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $575.2M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $434.4M | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | $965.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | 49.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 50.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 50.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 49.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 47.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 48.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.5% | 47.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 26.2% | 47.5% |
| Q4 25 | 34.7% | 33.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 36.9% | 34.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 35.1% | 33.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 41.7% | 33.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 32.8% | 30.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 38.7% | 30.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 38.3% | 29.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 40.0% | 27.9% |
| Q4 25 | 26.2% | 29.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.8% | 29.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 34.9% | 33.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 26.8% | 28.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.0% | 27.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 24.3% | 26.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 32.8% | 26.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 22.3% | 25.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.26 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.24 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.34 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.03 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.92 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.86 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $7.78 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $7.34 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $798.6M | $6.2B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $72.2B | $3.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $45.5B | $10.1B |
| Total Assets | $159.5B | $21.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.59× | 0.37× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $798.6M | $6.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $6.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $878.2M | $6.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.5B | $5.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | $5.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | $6.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.6B | $5.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $886.2M | $5.7B |
| Q4 25 | $72.2B | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $73.4B | $3.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $70.8B | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $70.9B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $68.2B | $4.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $63.7B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $62.2B | $4.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $59.4B | $4.5B |
| Q4 25 | $45.5B | $10.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $47.6B | $10.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $47.8B | $9.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $49.8B | $9.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $48.1B | $8.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $48.0B | $8.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $49.1B | $8.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $46.9B | $8.0B |
| Q4 25 | $159.5B | $21.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $158.4B | $21.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $154.5B | $21.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $160.6B | $20.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $159.9B | $19.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $150.2B | $19.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $146.9B | $18.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $139.2B | $18.3B |
| Q4 25 | 1.59× | 0.37× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.54× | 0.37× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.48× | 0.38× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.42× | 0.39× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.42× | 0.51× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.33× | 0.53× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.27× | 0.52× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.27× | 0.56× |
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 | $9.0B | $1.5B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $2.4B | $1.2B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 42.0% | 22.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 114.3% | 4.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 5.96× | 0.93× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $6.2B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $9.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.2B | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.2B | $741.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $862.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.3B | $1.4B |
| Q4 25 | $2.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $970.9M | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.3B | $553.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $761.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | 42.0% | 22.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 29.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 46.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 15.1% | 21.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 79.0% | 12.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 35.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 19.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 29.0% | 33.8% |
| Q4 25 | 114.3% | 4.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.6% | 6.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 90.1% | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 17.5% | 2.7% |
| Q4 25 | 5.96× | 0.93× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.13× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.48× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.29× | 0.98× | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.18× | 0.62× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.85× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.08× | 1.43× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ENB
Segment breakdown not available.
LRCX
| System | $3.4B | 63% |
| Customer Supportand Other | $2.0B | 37% |
