vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of GENMAB A/S (GMAB) and SERVICE CORP INTERNATIONAL (SCI). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
SERVICE CORP INTERNATIONAL is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.1B vs $925.0M, roughly 1.2× GENMAB A/S). GENMAB A/S runs the higher net margin — 36.3% vs 14.3%, a 22.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, GENMAB A/S posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (18.7% vs 1.7%). GENMAB A/S produced more free cash flow last quarter ($327.0M vs $87.2M).
Genmab A/S is a Danish biotechnology company, founded in February 1999 by Florian Schönharting, at the time managing director of BankInvest Biomedical venture fund. The company is based in Copenhagen, Denmark – internationally, it operates through the subsidiaries Genmab B.V. in Utrecht, The Netherlands, Genmab U.S., Inc. in Princeton, New Jersey, US, Genmab K.K. in Tokyo, Japan, Genmab Germany GmbH in München, Germany and Genmab (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. in Suzhou, China. Genmab is listed on the Co...
International Distribution Services Limited is a British company providing postal and courier services. IDS was created in 2013 by the UK government as a new holding company of Royal Mail, and a majority of its shares were then sold on the London Stock Exchange, with the government initially retaining a 30 per cent at the time. As of April 2025, IDS is owned and operated by Czech-based EP Group, owned by Daniel Křetínský.
GMAB vs SCI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $925.0M | $1.1B |
| Net Profit | $336.0M | $159.4M |
| Gross Margin | 93.8% | 28.0% |
| Operating Margin | 38.9% | 24.8% |
| Net Margin | 36.3% | 14.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 18.7% | 1.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 65.5% | 5.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $5.42 | $1.13 |
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 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $925.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $779.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | $159.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $117.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $336.0M | $122.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $142.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $151.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $117.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $203.0M | $118.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $131.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | 28.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 25.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 93.8% | 25.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 27.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 28.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 24.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 96.4% | 24.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 26.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | 24.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 21.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 38.9% | 21.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 23.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 24.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 20.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 30.3% | 21.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 22.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | 14.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 11.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 36.3% | 11.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 13.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 13.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 11.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 26.1% | 11.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 12.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.13 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.83 | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.42 | $0.86 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.98 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.02 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.81 | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.13 | $0.81 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.89 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.3B | $243.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $5.1B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $5.3B | $1.6B |
| Total Assets | $6.5B | $18.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 3.10× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $243.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $241.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $255.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $227.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $218.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $185.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $622.0M | $184.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $205.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | $5.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $5.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $5.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $4.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $4.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $4.6B |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.3B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.4B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.6B |
| Q4 25 | — | $18.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $18.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.5B | $18.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $17.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $17.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $17.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.6B | $16.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $16.7B |
| Q4 25 | — | 3.10× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.17× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.19× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.87× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.83× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.92× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 3.05× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.90× |
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 | $349.0M | $212.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $327.0M | $87.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 35.4% | 7.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.4% | 11.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.04× | 1.34× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $554.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $212.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $252.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $349.0M | $166.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $311.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $264.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $263.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $438.0M | $196.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $220.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | $87.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $150.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $327.0M | $83.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $233.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $151.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $162.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $430.0M | $100.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $140.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | 7.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 14.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 35.4% | 7.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 21.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 13.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 16.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 55.2% | 9.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 13.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 11.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 9.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.4% | 7.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 10.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 10.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.0% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 7.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.34× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.15× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.04× | 1.35× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.18× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.24× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.16× | 1.67× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.68× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GMAB
| Darzalex | $638.0M | 69% |
| Kesimpta | $108.0M | 12% |
| Net Product Sales | $101.0M | 11% |
| Other | $28.0M | 3% |
| Tepezza | $20.0M | 2% |
| Reimbursement Revenue | $13.0M | 1% |
| Bio N Tech | $11.0M | 1% |
| Abb Vie | $5.0M | 1% |
| Milestone Revenue | $1.0M | 0% |
SCI
| Cemetery | $510.9M | 46% |
| Funeral Matured Preneed Revenue | $196.5M | 18% |
| Cemetery Recognized Preneed Merchandise And Service Revenue | $107.4M | 10% |
| Cemetery Atneed Revenue | $104.9M | 9% |
| CA | $56.4M | 5% |
| Funeral Other Revenue | $54.6M | 5% |
| Cemetery Other Revenue | $40.2M | 4% |
| Nonfuneral Home Revenue | $28.1M | 3% |
| Non Funeral Home Preneed Sales Revenue | $22.0M | 2% |
