vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Figma, Inc. (FIG) and SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO CO (SMG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO CO is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($354.4M vs $274.2M, roughly 1.3× Figma, Inc.). SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO CO runs the higher net margin — -35.3% vs -400.1%, a 364.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Figma, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (38.0% vs -15.0%). Figma, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($49.5M vs $-390.4M).
Figma is a collaborative web application for interface design, with additional offline features enabled by desktop applications for macOS and Windows. The feature set of Figma focuses on user interface and user experience design, with an emphasis on real-time collaboration, utilizing a variety of vector graphics editor and prototyping tools. The Figma mobile app for Android and iOS allows viewing and interacting with Figma prototypes in real-time on mobile and tablet devices.
The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company is an American multinational corporation headquartered in Marysville, Ohio, where O.M. Scott began selling lawn seed in 1868. The company manufactures and sells consumer lawn, garden and pest control products, as well as soilless indoor gardening equipment. In the U.S., the company manufactures Scotts, Miracle-Gro and Ortho brands. It also markets and distributes the herbicide Roundup in the U.S. and several international markets including China.
FIG vs SMG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $274.2M | $354.4M |
| Net Profit | $-1.1B | $-125.0M |
| Gross Margin | 69.4% | 25.0% |
| Operating Margin | -414.6% | -6.2% |
| Net Margin | -400.1% | -35.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 38.0% | -15.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -6933.0% | -79.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-2.72 | $-2.16 |
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 | — | $354.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $274.2M | $387.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $249.6M | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $416.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $198.6M | $414.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $177.2M | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.5B |
| Q4 25 | — | $-125.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $28.2M | $149.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $217.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-69.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-15.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-827.9M | $132.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $157.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | 25.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 69.4% | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 88.8% | 31.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 38.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 22.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 90.6% | -7.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 77.7% | 29.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 30.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | -6.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -414.6% | -38.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | 18.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 24.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -12.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -23.8% | -52.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | -504.7% | 16.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 17.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | -35.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -400.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.3% | 12.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 15.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -16.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -7.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -467.2% | 11.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 10.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-2.16 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.72 | $-2.58 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.00 | $2.54 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.72 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-1.21 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.07 | $-4.21 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-4.39 | $2.28 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.74 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.6B | $8.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.4B | $-500.6M |
| Total Assets | $2.1B | $3.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $8.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $36.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.6B | $51.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $16.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $9.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $416.1M | $71.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $586.1M | $279.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $65.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $-500.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $-357.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $-170.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-290.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-479.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $-390.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $862.4M | $-146.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-250.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.1B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.0B | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $3.9B |
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 | $51.2M | $-370.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $49.5M | $-390.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 18.0% | -110.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.6% | 5.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $358.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $-370.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $51.2M | $174.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $454.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $188.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-445.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $118.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $588.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $304.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-390.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $49.5M | $131.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $437.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $179.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-474.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $101.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $574.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $287.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | -110.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.0% | 33.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 36.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 12.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -113.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 24.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 47.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 18.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.6% | 11.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 4.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.05× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.86× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.45× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.93× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FIG
| Non Us | $147.4M | 54% |
| US | $126.8M | 46% |
SMG
| Growing Media And Mulch | $111.5M | 31% |
| Lawn Care | $109.5M | 31% |
| Controls | $59.8M | 17% |
| Other Products Primarily Gardening | $23.9M | 7% |
| Restated Marketing Agreement | $19.4M | 5% |
| Growingmedia | $12.6M | 4% |
| Otherprimarilygardeningandcontrols | $10.2M | 3% |
| Other | $7.5M | 2% |
