vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Fossil Group, Inc. (FOSL) and Priority Technology Holdings, Inc. (PRTH). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Fossil Group, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($270.2M vs $247.1M, roughly 1.1× Priority Technology Holdings, Inc.). Priority Technology Holdings, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 3.6% vs -14.8%, a 18.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Priority Technology Holdings, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (8.8% vs -21.1%). Priority Technology Holdings, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($30.9M vs $-22.5M). Over the past eight quarters, Priority Technology Holdings, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (9.6% CAGR vs -11.4%).
Fossil Group, Inc., is an American fashion design and manufacturer founded in 1984 by Tom Kartsotis and based in Richardson, Texas. Their brands include Fossil, Relic, Michele Watch, Skagen Denmark, WSI, and Zodiac Watches. Fossil also makes licensed accessories for brands such as BMW, Puma, Emporio Armani, Michael Kors, DKNY, Diesel, Kate Spade New York, Tory Burch, Chaps, and Armani Exchange.
Information technology (IT) is the study or use of computers, telecommunication systems and other devices to create, process, store, retrieve and transmit information. While the term is commonly used to refer to computers and computer networks, it also encompasses other information distribution technologies such as television and telephones. Information technology is an application of computer science and computer engineering.
FOSL vs PRTH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $270.2M | $247.1M |
| Net Profit | $-40.0M | $8.9M |
| Gross Margin | 49.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | -8.0% | 13.6% |
| Net Margin | -14.8% | 3.6% |
| Revenue YoY | -21.1% | 8.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -257.8% | 23.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.76 | $0.10 |
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 | $270.2M | $247.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $220.4M | $241.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $233.3M | $239.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $224.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $342.3M | $227.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $287.8M | $227.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $260.0M | $219.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $254.9M | $205.7M |
| Q4 25 | $-40.0M | $8.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.1M | $27.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-17.9M | $10.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $8.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-11.2M | $7.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-31.9M | $10.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-38.8M | $994.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $-24.3M | $5.2M |
| Q4 25 | 49.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 57.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 61.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 53.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 49.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 52.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 52.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | -8.0% | 13.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.9% | 15.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.9% | 15.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 14.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -4.8% | 15.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | -8.5% | 16.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -13.1% | 15.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | -11.5% | 13.6% |
| Q4 25 | -14.8% | 3.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.0% | 11.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -7.7% | 4.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.3% | 3.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -11.1% | 4.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -14.9% | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | -9.5% | 2.5% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.76 | $0.10 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.04 | $0.34 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.33 | $0.14 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.10 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.15 | $-0.05 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.60 | $0.07 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.73 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.46 | $-0.10 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $79.2M | $77.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $169.1M | $1.0B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $112.6M | $-100.4M |
| Total Assets | $701.0M | $2.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.50× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $79.2M | $77.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $109.9M | $57.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $78.3M | $50.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $47.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $123.6M | $58.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $106.3M | $41.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $104.9M | $34.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $112.9M | $34.3M |
| Q4 25 | $169.1M | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $165.6M | $997.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $167.2M | $917.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $918.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $162.7M | $920.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $173.4M | $808.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $156.5M | $809.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $202.9M | $631.4M |
| Q4 25 | $112.6M | $-100.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $150.3M | $-110.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $140.6M | $-146.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-158.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $148.7M | $-166.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $164.4M | $-165.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $189.6M | $-172.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $229.1M | $-159.9M |
| Q4 25 | $701.0M | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $704.5M | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $686.0M | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $763.6M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $812.4M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $785.7M | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $891.0M | $1.6B |
| Q4 25 | 1.50× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.10× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.19× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.09× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.06× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.83× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.89× | — |
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 | $-22.2M | $36.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-22.5M | $30.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -8.3% | 12.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.1% | 2.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 4.12× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-46.0M | $75.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-22.2M | $36.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.4M | $36.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-60.4M | $17.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $10.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $30.5M | $23.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-22.8M | $19.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $38.4M | $28.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $622.0K | $13.3M |
| Q4 25 | $-22.5M | $30.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.6M | $30.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-60.6M | $9.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $28.5M | $19.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-24.1M | $14.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $36.6M | $23.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.1M | $6.7M |
| Q4 25 | -8.3% | 12.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.9% | 12.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -26.0% | 3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.3% | 8.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | -8.4% | 6.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.1% | 10.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.4% | 3.3% |
| Q4 25 | 0.1% | 2.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.4% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.1% | 3.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.6% | 2.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.4% | 2.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.7% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.7% | 3.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | 4.12× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.31× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.57× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.20× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.29× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.87× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 28.87× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.56× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FOSL
| Transferred At Point In Time | $109.7M | 41% |
| Traditional Watches | $91.3M | 34% |
| Other | $50.8M | 19% |
| Leathers | $9.5M | 4% |
| Jewelry | $4.0M | 1% |
| Smartwatches | $3.3M | 1% |
| Products Other | $1.6M | 1% |
PRTH
Segment breakdown not available.
