vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ENERGIZER HOLDINGS, INC. (ENR) and Rackspace Technology, Inc. (RXT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ENERGIZER HOLDINGS, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($778.9M vs $682.8M, roughly 1.1× Rackspace Technology, Inc.). ENERGIZER HOLDINGS, INC. runs the higher net margin — -0.4% vs -4.8%, a 4.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, ENERGIZER HOLDINGS, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (6.5% vs -0.4%). ENERGIZER HOLDINGS, INC. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($124.2M vs $56.0M). Over the past eight quarters, ENERGIZER HOLDINGS, INC.'s revenue compounded faster (8.4% CAGR vs -0.6%).
Energizer Holdings, Inc. is an American manufacturer and one of the world's largest manufacturers of batteries, headquartered in Clayton, Missouri. It produces batteries under the Energizer, Ray-O-Vac, Varta, and Eveready brand names and formerly owned several personal care businesses until it separated that side of the business into a new company called Edgewell Personal Care in 2015.
Rackspace Technology, Inc. is an American cloud computing company based in San Antonio, Texas. It also has offices in Reston, Virginia, as well as in Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, India, Dubai, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Singapore, Mexico, Toronto and Hong Kong. Its data centers are located in Amsterdam (Netherlands), Virginia (USA), Chicago (USA), Dallas (USA), London (UK), Frankfurt (Germany), Hong Kong (China), Kansas City (USA), New York City (USA), San Jose (USA), Shangh...
ENR vs RXT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $778.9M | $682.8M |
| Net Profit | $-3.4M | $-32.7M |
| Gross Margin | 32.9% | 17.6% |
| Operating Margin | -0.6% | -0.5% |
| Net Margin | -0.4% | -4.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 6.5% | -0.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | -115.2% | 41.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-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.
| Q4 25 | $778.9M | $682.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $832.8M | $671.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $725.3M | $666.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $662.9M | $665.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $731.7M | $685.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $805.7M | $675.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $701.4M | $684.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $663.3M | $690.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-3.4M | $-32.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $34.9M | $-67.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $153.5M | $-54.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $28.3M | $-71.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $22.3M | $-56.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $47.6M | $-186.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-43.8M | $25.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $32.4M | $-640.6M |
| Q4 25 | 32.9% | 17.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 36.6% | 19.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 55.1% | 19.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 39.1% | 19.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 36.8% | 19.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 38.1% | 20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.5% | 19.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 38.2% | 19.2% |
| Q4 25 | -0.6% | -0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.4% | -5.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.6% | -3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.5% | -5.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.1% | -4.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.4% | -25.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -8.2% | -7.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 6.4% | -94.5% |
| Q4 25 | -0.4% | -4.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.2% | -10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 21.2% | -8.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | -10.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.0% | -8.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.9% | -27.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -6.2% | 3.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.9% | -92.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.13 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.28 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.23 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.31 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.20 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.82 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.11 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-2.91 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $214.8M | $105.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $2.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $141.3M | $-1.2B |
| Total Assets | $4.4B | $2.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $214.8M | $105.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $236.2M | $99.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $171.1M | $103.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $139.3M | $128.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $195.9M | $144.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $216.9M | $157.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $146.7M | $190.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $158.1M | $282.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.2B | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.2B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.2B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.2B | $3.0B |
| Q4 25 | $141.3M | $-1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $169.9M | $-1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $183.2M | $-1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $133.9M | $-1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $140.6M | $-1.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $135.8M | $-949.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $123.4M | $-756.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $191.3M | $-787.2M |
| Q4 25 | $4.4B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.6B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.5B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.2B | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.3B | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.2B | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.3B | $3.5B |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.28× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.57× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 23.56× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.17× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.51× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 26.04× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 16.86× | — |
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 | $149.5M | $59.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $124.2M | $56.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 15.9% | 8.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.2% | 0.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $145.0M | $90.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $149.5M | $59.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $61.5M | $70.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $21.4M | $8.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-12.8M | $12.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $77.0M | $54.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $168.9M | $51.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $45.8M | $24.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $36.8M | $-90.3M |
| Q4 25 | $124.2M | $56.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $46.7M | $42.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.9M | $-12.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-33.8M | $4.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $42.4M | $34.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $141.5M | $27.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $27.3M | $-14.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.3M | $-118.4M |
| Q4 25 | 15.9% | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.6% | 6.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.1% | -1.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -5.1% | 0.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.8% | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.6% | 4.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.9% | -2.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.6% | -17.1% |
| Q4 25 | 3.2% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.8% | 4.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.9% | 3.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.2% | 1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.7% | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.4% | 3.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.6% | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.0% | 4.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.76× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.14× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.45× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.45× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.55× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.96× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.14× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ENR
| Alkaline Batteries | $666.5M | 86% |
| Auto Care | $93.7M | 12% |
| Lights | $18.7M | 2% |
RXT
| Public Cloud Services Segment | $442.2M | 65% |
| Private Cloud Service Segment | $240.6M | 35% |
