vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of EnerSys (ENS) and PAR PACIFIC HOLDINGS, INC. (PARR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
PAR PACIFIC HOLDINGS, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.8B vs $919.1M, roughly 2.0× EnerSys). EnerSys runs the higher net margin — 9.8% vs 2.5%, a 7.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, PAR PACIFIC HOLDINGS, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.5% vs 1.4%). Over the past eight quarters, EnerSys's revenue compounded faster (0.5% CAGR vs -4.9%).
EnerSys is a stored energy systems and technology provider for industrial applications. The company manufactures reserve-power and motive-power batteries, battery chargers, power equipment, battery accessories and outdoor equipment enclosures.
Par Pacific Holdings is a Houston-based American oil and gas exploration and production company. Known as Par Petroleum Corporation after it emerged from bankruptcy, it was renamed Par Pacific Holdings on October 20, 2015. As of 2017 it was a Fortune 1000 corporation.
ENS vs PARR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $919.1M | $1.8B |
| Net Profit | $90.4M | $46.2M |
| Gross Margin | 30.1% | — |
| Operating Margin | 13.5% | 3.1% |
| Net Margin | 9.8% | 2.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 1.4% | 4.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | -21.3% | 279.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $2.40 | $1.10 |
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 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q4 25 | $919.1M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $951.3M | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $893.0M | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $974.8M | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $906.2M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $883.7M | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $852.9M | $2.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | $46.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $90.4M | $77.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $68.4M | $262.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $57.5M | $59.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $96.5M | $-30.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $114.8M | $-55.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $82.3M | $7.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $70.1M | $18.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 30.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 28.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 31.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 32.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 28.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 27.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | 3.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | 13.5% | 5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.7% | 17.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.7% | 5.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.5% | -0.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.7% | -2.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.2% | 1.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.7% | 2.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | 2.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 9.8% | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.2% | 13.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.4% | 3.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.9% | -1.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.7% | -3.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.3% | 0.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.2% | 0.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.10 | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.40 | $1.40 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.80 | $5.16 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.46 | $1.17 | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.39 | $-0.57 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.88 | $-0.98 | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.01 | $0.13 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.71 | $0.32 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $450.1M | $172.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.9B | $1.5B |
| Total Assets | $4.0B | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $172.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $450.1M | $164.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $388.6M | $159.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $346.7M | $169.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $343.1M | $133.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $463.2M | $191.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $407.9M | $183.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $344.1M | $179.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $802.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $967.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.9B | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.8B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8B | $1.3B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.0B | $3.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.1B | $4.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.1B | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0B | $3.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.0B | $3.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.0B | $3.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.6B | $3.9B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.53× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.69× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.97× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.57× | 1.04× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.93× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.83× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.84× |
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 | $184.6M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $171.3M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 18.6% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.4% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.04× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $441.3M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $184.6M | $93.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $218.0M | $219.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $968.0K | $133.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $135.2M | $-1.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $81.1M | $-15.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $33.6M | $78.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.4M | $-4.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $171.3M | $66.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $197.1M | $187.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-32.1M | $85.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $104.9M | $-42.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $56.8M | $-63.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.3M | $50.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-25.7M | $-41.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 18.6% | 3.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.7% | 9.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.6% | 4.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.8% | -2.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.3% | -3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.4% | 2.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -3.0% | -2.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.4% | 1.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.2% | 1.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.7% | 2.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.1% | 2.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.7% | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.4% | 1.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.2% | 1.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.04× | 1.21× | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.19× | 0.84× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.02× | 2.25× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.40× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.71× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.41× | 10.48× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.15× | -0.25× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ENS
| Energy Systems | $399.5M | 43% |
| Motive Power | $352.0M | 38% |
| Services | $92.6M | 10% |
| Transferred Over Time | $38.2M | 4% |
| Other | $36.8M | 4% |
PARR
Segment breakdown not available.
