vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of EPAM Systems (EPAM) and Hasbro (HAS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Hasbro is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.4B vs $1.4B, roughly 1.0× EPAM Systems). Hasbro runs the higher net margin — 13.9% vs 7.8%, a 6.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Hasbro posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (31.3% vs 12.8%). Hasbro produced more free cash flow last quarter ($389.5M vs $268.1M). Over the past eight quarters, Hasbro's revenue compounded faster (38.2% CAGR vs 9.9%).
EPAM Systems, Inc. is an American company that specializes in software engineering services, digital platform engineering, and digital product design, operating out of Newtown, Pennsylvania. EPAM is a founding member of the MACH Alliance.
Hasbro, Inc. is an American multinational toy manufacturing and entertainment holding company founded on December 6, 1923 by Henry, Hillel and Herman Hassenfeld and is incorporated and headquartered in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Hasbro owns the trademarks and products of Kenner, Milton Bradley, Parker Brothers, and Wizards of the Coast, among others. As of August 2020, over 81.5% of its shares were held by large financial institutions.
EPAM vs HAS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.4B | $1.4B |
| Net Profit | $109.4M | $201.6M |
| Gross Margin | 30.1% | 68.7% |
| Operating Margin | 10.6% | 20.6% |
| Net Margin | 7.8% | 13.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 12.8% | 31.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 5.9% | 687.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.97 | $1.46 |
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 | $1.4B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $980.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | $887.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $995.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.2B | $757.3M |
| Q4 25 | $109.4M | $201.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $106.8M | $233.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $88.0M | $-855.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $73.5M | $98.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $103.3M | $-34.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $136.3M | $223.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $98.6M | $138.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $116.2M | $58.2M |
| Q4 25 | 30.1% | 68.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.5% | 70.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 28.8% | 77.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 26.9% | 76.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 30.4% | 67.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 34.6% | 70.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 29.3% | 76.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 28.4% | 73.0% |
| Q4 25 | 10.6% | 20.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.4% | 24.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | -81.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.6% | 19.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.9% | 5.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.2% | 23.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.5% | 21.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 9.5% | 15.3% |
| Q4 25 | 7.8% | 13.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.7% | 16.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.5% | -87.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.6% | 11.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.3% | -3.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.7% | 17.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.6% | 13.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.0% | 7.7% |
| Q4 25 | $1.97 | $1.46 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.91 | $1.64 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.56 | $-6.10 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.28 | $0.70 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.80 | $-0.25 | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.37 | $1.59 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.70 | $0.99 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.97 | $0.42 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.3B | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.7B | $565.5M |
| Total Assets | $4.9B | $5.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.1B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.0B | — |
| Q4 25 | $3.7B | $565.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.7B | $433.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.7B | $269.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.6B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.6B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.5B | $1.0B |
| Q4 25 | $4.9B | $5.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.8B | $5.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.7B | $5.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.7B | $6.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.8B | $6.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.5B | $7.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.2B | $6.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.4B | $6.2B |
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 | $282.9M | $403.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $268.1M | $389.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 19.0% | 26.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.1% | 0.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.59× | 2.00× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $612.7M | $829.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $282.9M | $403.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $294.7M | $280.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $53.2M | $71.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $24.2M | $138.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $130.3M | $259.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $242.0M | $222.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $57.0M | $187.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $129.9M | $177.8M |
| Q4 25 | $268.1M | $389.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $286.4M | $260.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $43.4M | $55.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $14.8M | $124.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $114.5M | $200.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $237.0M | $174.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $52.3M | $135.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $123.2M | $132.0M |
| Q4 25 | 19.0% | 26.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.5% | 18.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.2% | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.1% | 14.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.2% | 18.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.3% | 13.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.6% | 13.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.6% | 17.4% |
| Q4 25 | 1.1% | 0.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.6% | 1.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.7% | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.7% | 1.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.3% | 5.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.4% | 3.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.4% | 5.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.6% | 6.0% |
| Q4 25 | 2.59× | 2.00× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.76× | 1.20× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.60× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.33× | 1.40× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.26× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.77× | 1.00× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.58× | 1.35× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.12× | 3.05× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
EPAM
Segment breakdown not available.
HAS
| Grow Brands | $1.1B | 75% |
| Optimize Brands | $188.7M | 13% |
| Digital And Licensing Gaming | $135.7M | 9% |
| Class Of Principal Product Family Brands | $13.1M | 1% |
| Filmand TV | $2.4M | 0% |
