vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of FOSTER L B CO (FSTR) and RAMBUS INC (RMBS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
RAMBUS INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($180.2M vs $160.4M, roughly 1.1× FOSTER L B CO). RAMBUS INC runs the higher net margin — 33.2% vs 1.5%, a 31.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, FOSTER L B CO posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (25.1% vs 8.1%). Over the past eight quarters, RAMBUS INC's revenue compounded faster (16.8% CAGR vs 13.6%).
Foster L B Co. is a U.S.-headquartered industrial manufacturing firm that develops, produces and distributes engineered access solutions, construction components, and rail infrastructure products. It serves commercial construction, transportation, and industrial end markets across North America and selected international regions.
Rambus Inc. is an American technology company that designs, develops and licenses chip interface technologies and architectures that are used in digital electronics products. The company, founded in 1990, is well known for inventing RDRAM and for its intellectual property-based litigation following the introduction of DDR-SDRAM memory.
FSTR vs RMBS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $160.4M | $180.2M |
| Net Profit | $2.4M | $59.9M |
| Gross Margin | 19.7% | 79.7% |
| Operating Margin | 4.9% | 34.3% |
| Net Margin | 1.5% | 33.2% |
| Revenue YoY | 25.1% | 8.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 1098.3% | -7.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.22 | $0.55 |
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 | — | $180.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $160.4M | $190.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $138.3M | $178.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $143.6M | $172.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $97.8M | $166.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $128.2M | $161.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $137.5M | $145.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $140.8M | $132.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | $59.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.4M | $63.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.4M | $48.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9M | $57.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.1M | $60.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-242.0K | $62.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $35.9M | $48.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.8M | $36.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | 79.7% | ||
| Q4 25 | 19.7% | 78.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 22.5% | 79.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 21.5% | 79.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.6% | 80.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.3% | 80.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.8% | 80.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.7% | 79.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | 34.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.9% | 37.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.0% | 35.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.3% | 36.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.0% | 37.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.4% | 35.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.3% | 37.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.2% | 30.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | 33.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.5% | 33.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.1% | 27.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.0% | 33.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.2% | 36.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.2% | 38.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.1% | 33.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.0% | 27.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.55 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.22 | $0.58 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.40 | $0.44 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.27 | $0.53 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.20 | $0.56 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.04 | $0.57 | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.27 | $0.45 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.26 | $0.33 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $4.3M | $134.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $42.6M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $175.3M | — |
| Total Assets | $330.4M | $1.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.24× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $134.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.3M | $182.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4M | $79.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2M | $87.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.6M | $132.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.5M | $99.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.1M | $114.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.0M | $124.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $42.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $58.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $81.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $82.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $46.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $68.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $87.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $175.3M | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $174.8M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $174.4M | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $170.8M | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $178.3M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $181.9M | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $147.1M | $1.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | $330.4M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $333.9M | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $349.9M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $342.8M | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $334.6M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $344.5M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $333.3M | $1.3B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.24× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.33× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.47× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.48× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.26× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.38× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.59× | — |
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 | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $19.8M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 12.3% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.5% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 9.18× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $25.2M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $22.2M | $99.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $29.2M | $88.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.4M | $94.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-26.1M | $77.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $24.3M | $59.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $24.7M | $62.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.0M | $70.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $19.8M | $93.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $26.4M | $82.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.7M | $87.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-28.7M | $69.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $22.3M | $52.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $21.7M | $52.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-7.0M | $59.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 12.3% | 49.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.1% | 46.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.4% | 51.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -29.4% | 41.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.4% | 32.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.8% | 35.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -5.0% | 44.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.5% | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.0% | 3.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.9% | 3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.6% | 4.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.5% | 4.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.2% | 6.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.5% | 8.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 9.18× | 1.56× | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.70× | 1.83× | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.61× | 1.63× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.28× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.95× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.69× | 1.28× | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.74× | 1.95× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FSTR
| Rail Technologies And Services Segment | $98.0M | 61% |
| Over Time Output Method | $26.3M | 16% |
| Services | $19.4M | 12% |
| Rail Technologies Products | $10.0M | 6% |
| Over Time Input Method | $8.3M | 5% |
RMBS
| Product revenue | $88.0M | 49% |
| Royalties | $69.6M | 39% |
| Contract and other revenue | $22.6M | 13% |
