vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of FRIEDMAN INDUSTRIES INC (FRD) and KILROY REALTY CORP (KRC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
KILROY REALTY CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($272.2M vs $168.0M, roughly 1.6× FRIEDMAN INDUSTRIES INC). KILROY REALTY CORP runs the higher net margin — 6.3% vs 1.8%, a 4.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, FRIEDMAN INDUSTRIES INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (78.6% vs -5.0%). KILROY REALTY CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($450.3M vs $-6.3M). Over the past eight quarters, FRIEDMAN INDUSTRIES INC's revenue compounded faster (13.3% CAGR vs -1.2%).
Hellman & Friedman (H&F) is an American private equity firm founded in 1984 by Warren Hellman and Tully Friedman that makes investments primarily through leveraged buyouts as well as growth capital investments. It has focused its efforts on several core target industries including media, financial services, professional services and information services.
Kilroy Realty Corp is a leading U.S. real estate investment trust that develops, owns, and operates premium office, life science, and mixed-use properties primarily across high-growth West Coast markets including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and San Diego. It serves tenants across the technology, life sciences, media, and creative sectors, with a core focus on delivering sustainable, future-ready workspaces tailored to modern business needs.
FRD vs KRC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $168.0M | $272.2M |
| Net Profit | $3.0M | $17.1M |
| Gross Margin | 2.3% | — |
| Operating Margin | 2.3% | — |
| Net Margin | 1.8% | 6.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 78.6% | -5.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 364.1% | -73.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.43 | $0.11 |
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 | $168.0M | $272.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $152.4M | $279.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $134.8M | $289.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $270.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $94.1M | $286.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $106.8M | $289.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $114.6M | $280.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $278.6M |
| Q4 25 | $3.0M | $17.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2M | $162.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.0M | $79.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $43.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.2M | $65.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-675.0K | $57.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.6M | $54.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $55.7M |
| Q4 25 | 2.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 2.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -1.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.8% | 6.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.5% | 58.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.7% | 27.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 16.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -1.2% | 22.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.6% | 19.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.2% | 19.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 20.0% |
| Q4 25 | $0.43 | $0.11 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.32 | $1.31 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.71 | $0.57 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.33 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.17 | $0.50 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $0.44 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.37 | $0.41 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.42 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $3.0M | $179.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $142.2M | $5.4B |
| Total Assets | $311.9M | $10.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $3.0M | $179.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.6M | $372.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1M | $193.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $146.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1M | $165.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.5M | $625.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.1M | $835.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $855.0M |
| Q4 25 | $142.2M | $5.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $139.3M | $5.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $137.3M | $5.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $5.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $127.3M | $5.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $128.8M | $5.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $129.7M | $5.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $5.4B |
| Q4 25 | $311.9M | $10.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $311.3M | $11.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $219.1M | $10.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $10.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $210.3M | $10.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $209.2M | $11.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $222.8M | $11.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $11.6B |
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 | $-4.7M | $566.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-6.3M | $450.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -3.8% | 165.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.0% | 42.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -1.56× | 33.10× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $833.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-4.7M | $566.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $434.0K | $176.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.5M | $143.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $136.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $541.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $176.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-6.1M | $88.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $167.9M |
| Q4 25 | $-6.3M | $450.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.0M | $148.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.7M | $118.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $115.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $440.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $147.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-7.1M | $69.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $151.9M |
| Q4 25 | -3.8% | 165.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.3% | 53.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.2% | 40.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 42.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 153.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 50.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -6.2% | 24.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 54.5% |
| Q4 25 | 1.0% | 42.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.6% | 10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 8.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 35.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 10.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.9% | 6.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 5.7% |
| Q4 25 | -1.56× | 33.10× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.19× | 1.09× | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.08× | 1.81× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.13× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 8.32× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.06× | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.36× | 1.63× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 3.01× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FRD
| Prime Coil | $152.0M | 90% |
| Manufactured Pipe | $14.9M | 9% |
| Customer Owned | $1.1M | 1% |
KRC
Segment breakdown not available.
