vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Fortive (FTV) and UNITED THERAPEUTICS Corp (UTHR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Fortive is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.1B vs $790.2M, roughly 1.4× UNITED THERAPEUTICS Corp). UNITED THERAPEUTICS Corp runs the higher net margin — 46.1% vs 12.8%, a 33.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Fortive posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (7.7% vs 7.4%). Fortive produced more free cash flow last quarter ($193.8M vs $173.3M). Over the past eight quarters, UNITED THERAPEUTICS Corp's revenue compounded faster (8.0% CAGR vs -17.0%).
Fortive Corporation is an American industrial technology conglomerate company headquartered in Everett, Washington. The company specializes in providing essential technologies for connected workflow solutions; designing, developing, manufacturing and distributing professional and engineered products, software and services. Their products and services are split into three strategic segments; Intelligent Operating Solutions, Precision Technologies, and Advanced Healthcare Solutions. As of Decem...
United Therapeutics Corporation is an American biotechnology company that develops pharmaceuticals and technologies related to organ transplantation, including xenotransplantation. Many of the company's products are focused towards lung disease and organ manufacturing. United Therapeutics is co-headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland and Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, with additional facilities in Magog and Bromont, Quebec; Melbourne and Jacksonville, Florida; Blacksburg, Virginia; ...
FTV vs UTHR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.1B | $790.2M |
| Net Profit | $136.4M | $364.3M |
| Gross Margin | 63.2% | 86.9% |
| Operating Margin | 17.9% | 45.1% |
| Net Margin | 12.8% | 46.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 7.7% | 7.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 21.1% | 20.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.44 | $7.66 |
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 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $790.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $799.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.5B | $798.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.5B | $794.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $735.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $748.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6B | $714.9M |
| Q1 26 | $136.4M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $185.7M | $364.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $55.0M | $338.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $166.6M | $309.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $171.9M | $322.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $208.8M | $301.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $221.6M | $309.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $195.1M | $278.1M |
| Q1 26 | 63.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 63.2% | 86.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 63.2% | 87.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 59.0% | 89.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 59.8% | 88.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 60.3% | 89.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 60.0% | 88.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 59.8% | 89.1% |
| Q1 26 | 17.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 20.1% | 45.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.5% | 48.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.6% | 45.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 15.8% | 48.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.0% | 48.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.3% | 45.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.4% | 44.7% |
| Q1 26 | 12.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 16.5% | 46.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.4% | 42.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.0% | 38.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 11.7% | 40.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.9% | 40.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.4% | 41.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.6% | 38.9% |
| Q1 26 | $0.44 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.60 | $7.66 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.16 | $7.16 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.49 | $6.41 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.50 | $6.63 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.60 | $6.23 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.63 | $6.39 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.55 | $5.85 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $356.1M | $2.9B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.5B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $6.1B | $7.1B |
| Total Assets | $11.6B | $7.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.57× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $356.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $375.5M | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $430.8M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $3.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $892.1M | $3.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $813.3M | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $811.3M | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $644.1M | $3.0B |
| Q1 26 | $3.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.2B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.8B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.8B | — |
| Q1 26 | $6.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.5B | $7.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.5B | $6.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.4B | $7.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.2B | $6.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.2B | $6.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $10.6B | $6.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.5B | $5.7B |
| Q1 26 | $11.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $11.7B | $7.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.9B | $7.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.2B | $7.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.1B | $7.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.0B | $7.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.5B | $7.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.3B | $6.7B |
| Q1 26 | 0.57× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.50× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.51× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.46× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.38× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.36× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.37× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.36× | — |
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 | $234.8M | $346.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $193.8M | $173.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 18.1% | 21.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.5% | 21.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.72× | 0.95× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $935.2M | $1.0B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $234.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $346.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $164.4M | $562.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $311.2M | $191.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $241.7M | $461.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $502.2M | $341.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $459.0M | $377.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $308.9M | $232.2M |
| Q1 26 | $193.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $313.8M | $173.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $153.1M | $351.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $274.5M | $129.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $215.0M | $386.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $465.2M | $254.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $431.2M | $300.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $279.7M | $187.1M |
| Q1 26 | 18.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 28.0% | 21.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.9% | 44.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.1% | 16.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 14.6% | 48.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 28.7% | 34.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 28.1% | 40.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.0% | 26.2% |
| Q1 26 | 2.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 21.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | 26.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.4% | 7.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.8% | 9.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.3% | 11.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.8% | 10.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | 6.3% |
| Q1 26 | 1.72× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.83× | 0.95× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.99× | 1.66× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.87× | 0.62× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.41× | 1.43× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.41× | 1.13× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.07× | 1.22× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.58× | 0.83× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FTV
Segment breakdown not available.
UTHR
| Tyvaso DPI | $338.6M | 43% |
| Remodulin | $128.0M | 16% |
| Nebulized Tyvaso | $125.7M | 16% |
| Orenitram | $121.2M | 15% |
| Unituxin | $62.3M | 8% |
| Adcirca | $7.8M | 1% |
| Other | $6.6M | 1% |
