vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Fidelity National Financial, Inc. (FNF) and Garrett Motion Inc. (GTX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Garrett Motion Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($985.0M vs $544.0M, roughly 1.8× Fidelity National Financial, Inc.). Garrett Motion Inc. runs the higher net margin — 9.6% vs -21.5%, a 31.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Garrett Motion Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (12.2% vs 10.3%). Over the past eight quarters, Fidelity National Financial, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (13.7% CAGR vs 5.2%).
Fidelity National Financial, Inc., is an American provider of title insurance and settlement services to the real estate and mortgage industries. A Fortune 500 company, Fidelity National Financial generated approximately $8.469 billion in annual revenue in 2019 from its title and real estate-related operations. The company was the first instance of an attorney licensed by a Native American Tribe being certified as "authorized house counsel" in the state of Florida.
Garrett Motion Inc., formerly Honeywell Transportation Systems and Honeywell Turbo Technologies, is an American company primarily involved in engineering, development and manufacturing of turbochargers and related forced induction systems for ground vehicles from small passenger cars to large trucks and industrial equipment and construction machinery. It originated as part of Garrett AiResearch's Industrial Division in Phoenix, Arizona, in 1954, after which they entered a contract to provide ...
FNF vs GTX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $544.0M | $985.0M |
| Net Profit | $-117.0M | $95.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | 19.9% |
| Operating Margin | 82.9% | — |
| Net Margin | -21.5% | 9.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 10.3% | 12.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -126.0% | 53.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.44 | — |
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 | — | $985.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $544.0M | $891.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $553.0M | $902.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $547.0M | $913.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $455.0M | $878.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $493.0M | $844.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $506.0M | $826.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $504.0M | $890.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $95.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-117.0M | $84.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $358.0M | $77.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $278.0M | $87.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $83.0M | $62.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $450.0M | $100.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $266.0M | $52.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $306.0M | $64.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 19.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 20.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 20.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 19.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 20.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 21.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 20.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 20.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 82.9% | 11.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 81.9% | 11.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 69.8% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.4% | 9.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 11.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 61.9% | 9.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 90.9% | 9.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 9.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | -21.5% | 9.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 64.7% | 8.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 50.8% | 9.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.2% | 7.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 91.3% | 11.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 52.6% | 6.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 60.7% | 7.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.44 | $0.42 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.33 | $0.38 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.02 | $0.42 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.30 | $0.30 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.65 | $0.46 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.97 | $0.24 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.12 | $0.28 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.6B | $142.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $4.4B | $1.4B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $7.4B | — |
| Total Assets | $109.0B | $2.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.59× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $142.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.6B | $177.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.5B | $230.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.3B | $232.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.5B | $130.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.5B | $125.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.0B | $96.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.9B | $98.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.4B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.4B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.4B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.4B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.2B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.2B | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.4B | $-802.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.4B | $-813.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.9B | $-812.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.9B | $-700.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.8B | $-673.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.1B | $-778.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.3B | $-725.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $109.0B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $106.6B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $102.3B | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $98.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $95.4B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $94.7B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $88.8B | $2.2B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.59× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.53× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.56× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.56× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.56× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.52× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.58× | — |
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 | $1.5B | $98.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $49.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 5.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.03× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $360.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $98.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $99.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $100.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $158.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $56.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5B | $131.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4B | $67.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $126.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $49.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $78.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $90.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $143.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $30.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $109.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $47.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $109.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 5.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 8.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 15.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 12.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 5.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 12.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 2.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | 1.03× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.18× | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.66× | 1.30× | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.82× | 1.82× | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.43× | 0.90× | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.32× | 1.31× | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.89× | 1.29× | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.45× | 1.97× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FNF
| Escrow Fees | $241.0M | 44% |
| Other Title Related Fees And Income | $182.0M | 33% |
| Service Link Excluding Title Premiums Escrow Fees And Subservicing Fees | $87.0M | 16% |
| Insurance Contracts Home Warranty | $31.0M | 6% |
GTX
Segment breakdown not available.
