vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Great Lakes Dredge & Dock CORP (GLDD) and Tempus AI, Inc. (TEM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Tempus AI, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($367.2M vs $256.5M, roughly 1.4× Great Lakes Dredge & Dock CORP). Great Lakes Dredge & Dock CORP runs the higher net margin — 4.9% vs -14.8%, a 19.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Tempus AI, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (83.0% vs 26.5%). Great Lakes Dredge & Dock CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($50.3M vs $-41.5M). Over the past eight quarters, Tempus AI, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (58.7% CAGR vs 13.6%).
Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company is an American company providing construction services in dredging and land reclamation, currently the largest such provider in the United States. GLD&D operates primarily in the United States but conducts one-quarter of its business overseas. The company was based in Oak Brook, Illinois, but in October 2020 relocated its corporate headquarters to Houston, Texas.
Tempus AI, Inc. is an American health technology company founded in 2015 by Eric Lefkofsky in Chicago, Illinois. It was established by Lefkofsky soon after his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. Tempus uses data and artificial intelligence (AI) to create precision medicine services, including diagnostics, for oncology, cardiology, radiology, and depression. The company went public on the Nasdaq on June 14, 2024, under the ticker symbol "TEM."
GLDD vs TEM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $256.5M | $367.2M |
| Net Profit | $12.6M | $-54.2M |
| Gross Margin | 20.9% | — |
| Operating Margin | 12.7% | -16.7% |
| Net Margin | 4.9% | -14.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 26.5% | 83.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -35.9% | -316.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.19 | $-0.30 |
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 | $256.5M | $367.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $195.2M | $334.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $193.8M | $314.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $242.9M | $255.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $202.8M | $200.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $191.2M | $180.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $170.1M | $166.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $198.7M | $145.8M |
| Q4 25 | $12.6M | $-54.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $17.7M | $-80.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.7M | $-42.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $33.4M | $-68.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.7M | $-13.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.9M | $-75.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.7M | $-552.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $21.0M | $-64.7M |
| Q4 25 | 20.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 22.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 28.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 24.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 17.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 22.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | 12.7% | -16.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.4% | -18.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.8% | -19.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.6% | -26.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.8% | -25.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.7% | -29.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.6% | -321.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.8% | -36.5% |
| Q4 25 | 4.9% | -14.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.1% | -23.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.0% | -13.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.8% | -26.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.7% | -6.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.6% | -41.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.5% | -332.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.6% | -44.4% |
| Q4 25 | $0.19 | $-0.30 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.26 | $-0.46 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.14 | $-0.25 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.49 | $-0.40 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.29 | $2.56 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.13 | $-0.46 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.11 | $-6.86 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.31 | $-1.47 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $13.4M | $604.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $378.2M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $517.1M | $491.3M |
| Total Assets | $1.3B | $2.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.73× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $13.4M | $604.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.7M | $655.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9M | $186.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.3M | $151.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.2M | $341.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.0M | $388.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $23.1M | $478.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $22.8M | $79.9M |
| Q4 25 | $378.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $448.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $517.1M | $491.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $502.1M | $507.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $481.9M | $309.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $479.9M | $326.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $448.9M | $56.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $425.4M | $53.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $418.0M | $98.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $409.0M | $-1.5B |
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | $926.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $971.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $864.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.73× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.00× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $79.7M | $-36.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $50.3M | $-41.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 19.6% | -11.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 11.5% | 1.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 6.31× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $99.5M | $-239.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $79.7M | $-36.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $49.2M | $-119.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $56.9M | $44.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $60.9M | $-105.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-13.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $26.8M | $48.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.4M | $-97.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $38.4M | $-101.4M |
| Q4 25 | $50.3M | $-41.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.2M | $-126.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.7M | $36.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $39.6M | $-107.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-36.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-11.5M | $48.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-34.0M | $-105.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $26.5M | $-107.5M |
| Q4 25 | 19.6% | -11.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.8% | -37.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -1.9% | 11.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 16.3% | -42.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -17.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -6.0% | 26.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -20.0% | -63.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.4% | -73.7% |
| Q4 25 | 11.5% | 1.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.4% | 2.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 31.3% | 2.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.7% | 0.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 11.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.0% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 30.8% | 4.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 6.0% | 4.2% |
| Q4 25 | 6.31× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.77× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.87× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.82× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.69× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.02× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.39× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.83× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
