vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of FLEXSTEEL INDUSTRIES INC (FLXS) and HA Sustainable Infrastructure Capital, Inc. (HASI). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
FLEXSTEEL INDUSTRIES INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($115.1M vs $114.8M, roughly 1.0× HA Sustainable Infrastructure Capital, Inc.). FLEXSTEEL INDUSTRIES INC runs the higher net margin — 17.7% vs -46.8%, a 64.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, HA Sustainable Infrastructure Capital, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (13.3% vs 1.0%). Over the past eight quarters, HA Sustainable Infrastructure Capital, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (4.2% CAGR vs 1.9%).
Flexsteel Industries Inc is a leading U.S.-headquartered furniture manufacturer that designs, produces and distributes a wide portfolio of upholstered residential, commercial, and hospitality furniture. It primarily operates across North American markets, serving end consumers, retail partners and corporate clients through its extensive distribution network.
HA Sustainable Infrastructure Capital, Inc. (HASI) is a specialized investment firm focused on sustainable infrastructure assets covering renewable energy, energy efficiency, sustainable real estate and low-carbon utility segments. It primarily operates in North American markets, providing long-term capital to eligible sustainable projects and delivering stable risk-adjusted returns to investors through recurring cash flows from operational underlying assets.
FLXS vs HASI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2027 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $115.1M | $114.8M |
| Net Profit | $20.4M | $-53.8M |
| Gross Margin | 22.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -57.4% |
| Net Margin | 17.7% | -46.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 1.0% | 13.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 116.0% | -176.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.14 | $-0.38 |
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.
| Q3 26 | $115.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $118.2M | $114.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $110.4M | $103.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $114.6M | $85.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $114.0M | $96.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $108.5M | $101.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $104.0M | $82.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $110.8M | $94.5M |
| Q3 26 | $20.4M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.6M | $-53.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.3M | $83.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.7M | $98.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-3.7M | $56.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.1M | $70.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.1M | $-19.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.9M | $26.5M |
| Q3 26 | 22.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 22.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 23.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 22.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 21.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.3% | — |
| Q3 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.6% | -57.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.4% | 84.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.7% | 90.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.8% | -32.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.9% | 39.5% |
| Q3 26 | 17.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.6% | -46.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.6% | 80.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | 114.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -3.3% | 58.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.3% | 69.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.0% | -23.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.4% | 28.1% |
| Q3 26 | $1.14 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.18 | $-0.38 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.31 | $0.61 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.90 | $0.74 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.71 | $0.44 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.62 | $0.58 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.74 | $-0.17 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.87 | $0.23 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $57.3M | $110.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $185.3M | $2.7B |
| Total Assets | $290.2M | $8.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 26 | $57.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $36.8M | $110.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $38.6M | $301.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $40.0M | $86.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $22.6M | $67.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.8M | $129.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.7M | $44.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.8M | $145.7M |
| Q3 26 | $185.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $178.9M | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $172.2M | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $167.9M | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $158.1M | $2.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $161.9M | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $154.7M | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $150.4M | $2.3B |
| Q3 26 | $290.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $290.2M | $8.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $281.5M | $8.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $282.5M | $7.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $266.1M | $7.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $271.5M | $7.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $268.7M | $6.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $274.5M | $6.7B |
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 | $27.2M | $167.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.33× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 26 | $27.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.0M | $167.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.1M | $-121.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.6M | $79.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.3M | $-37.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.7M | $5.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4M | $21.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.5M | $-24.8M |
| Q3 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-735.0K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.1M | — |
| Q3 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -0.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.4% | — |
| Q3 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.4% | — |
| Q3 26 | 1.33× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.15× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.56× | -1.46× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.46× | 0.81× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -0.66× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.74× | 0.08× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.58× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.53× | -0.94× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
