vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of National Vision Holdings, Inc. (EYE) and STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. (STRL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($825.7M vs $487.3M, roughly 1.7× National Vision Holdings, Inc.). STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. runs the higher net margin — 11.6% vs 0.7%, a 10.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (91.6% vs 7.9%). Over the past eight quarters, STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE, INC.'s revenue compounded faster (19.0% CAGR vs 7.6%).
Vision Research is an international company that manufactures high-speed digital cameras based in Wayne, New Jersey. Their cameras are marketed under the Phantom brand, and are used in a broad variety of industries including: defense, industrial product development, manufacturing, automotive, scientific research, and entertainment. Vision Research is a business unit of the Materials Analysis Division of Ametek Inc., a global manufacturer of electronic instruments and electromechanical devices.
Sterling & Wilson is an Indian multinational engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) company headquartered in Mumbai, Maharashtra. It operates across multiple sectors including renewable energy, data centers, diesel power generation, and mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) services. The company has delivered projects in over 30 countries, with execution teams located across Asia, the Middle East, Africa, Europe, and Australia.
EYE vs STRL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $487.3M | $825.7M |
| Net Profit | $3.4M | $96.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | 23.5% |
| Operating Margin | 2.0% | 16.7% |
| Net Margin | 0.7% | 11.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 7.9% | 91.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | 139.8% | 143.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.04 | $3.09 |
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 | — | $825.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $755.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $487.3M | $689.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $486.4M | $614.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $510.3M | $430.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $437.3M | $498.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $451.5M | $593.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $451.7M | $582.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | $96.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $87.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4M | $92.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.7M | $71.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $14.2M | $39.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-28.6M | $113.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-8.5M | $61.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-3.1M | $51.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | 23.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 21.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 24.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 23.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 22.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 21.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 21.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 19.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | 16.7% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 15.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.0% | 18.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.4% | 17.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.1% | 13.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -5.8% | 12.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.0% | 14.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.1% | 12.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | 11.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 11.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.7% | 13.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.8% | 11.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.8% | 9.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -6.5% | 22.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -1.9% | 10.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.7% | 8.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | $3.09 | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.82 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.04 | $2.97 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.11 | $2.31 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.18 | $1.28 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.36 | $3.63 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.11 | $1.97 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.04 | $1.67 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $56.0M | $511.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $236.5M | $287.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $858.8M | $1.2B |
| Total Assets | $2.0B | $2.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.28× | 0.24× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $511.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $390.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $56.0M | $306.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $48.5M | $699.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $80.0M | $638.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $73.9M | $664.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $81.2M | $648.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $179.5M | $540.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $287.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $236.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $255.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $244.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $248.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $252.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $143.9M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $858.8M | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $850.6M | $881.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $836.2M | $805.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $816.3M | $808.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $840.0M | $716.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $843.4M | $670.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.0B | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.0B | $2.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.0B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.0B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.1B | $2.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.24× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.28× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.30× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.29× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.30× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.30× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.17× | — |
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 | $46.6M | $165.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $30.3M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 6.2% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.4% | 2.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 13.83× | 1.73× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $83.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $165.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $186.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $46.6M | $83.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $54.3M | $85.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $32.2M | $84.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $30.3M | $174.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $27.9M | $152.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $51.5M | $121.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $159.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $30.3M | $64.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $42.4M | $72.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.0M | $67.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.7M | $158.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.1M | $138.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $31.9M | $92.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 21.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.2% | 9.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.7% | 11.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.4% | 15.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.4% | 31.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.9% | 23.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.1% | 15.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 2.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 3.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.4% | 2.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.4% | 2.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.0% | 4.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.3% | 3.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.3% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.3% | 5.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | 1.73× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 2.12× | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.83× | 0.91× | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.22× | 1.20× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.27× | 2.15× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.54× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.48× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.33× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
EYE
Segment breakdown not available.
STRL
| E-Infrastructure Solutions | $597.7M | 72% |
| Transportation Solutions | $132.9M | 16% |
| Building Solutions | $95.1M | 12% |
