vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO (GT) and Leidos (LDOS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.9B vs $4.2B, roughly 1.2× Leidos). Leidos runs the higher net margin — 7.8% vs 2.1%, a 5.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-0.6% vs -3.5%). GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.3B vs $452.0M). Over the past eight quarters, GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO's revenue compounded faster (4.1% CAGR vs 3.1%).
Cooper Tire & Rubber Company is an American company that specializes in the design, manufacture, marketing, and sales of replacement automobile and truck tires, and has subsidiaries that specialize in medium truck, motorcycle, and racing tires. With headquarters in Findlay, Ohio, Cooper Tire has 60 manufacturing, sales, distribution, technical, and design facilities within its worldwide family of subsidiary companies, including the UK-based Avon Tyres brand, which produces tires for motorcycl...
Leidos Holdings, Inc. is an American defense, aviation, information technology, and biomedical research company headquartered in Reston, Virginia, that provides scientific, engineering, systems integration, and technical services. Founded as Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Leidos merged with Lockheed Martin's IT sector, Information Systems & Global Solutions, in August 2016 to create the defense industry’s largest IT services provider.
GT vs LDOS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.9B | $4.2B |
| Net Profit | $105.0M | $327.0M |
| Gross Margin | 20.9% | 17.4% |
| Operating Margin | 3.3% | 11.3% |
| Net Margin | 2.1% | 7.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -0.6% | -3.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | 43.8% | 15.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.36 | $2.54 |
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 | — | $4.2B | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.9B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.6B | $4.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.5B | $4.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.3B | $4.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.9B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.8B | $4.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.6B | $4.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | $327.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $105.0M | $367.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.2B | $391.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $254.0M | $363.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.0M | $284.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $73.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-37.0M | $364.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $79.0M | $322.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 17.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | 20.9% | 18.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.2% | 18.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.0% | 17.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 17.4% | 15.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.5% | 17.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 20.6% | 16.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | 11.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.3% | 12.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -15.8% | 13.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.8% | 12.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.1% | 9.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.6% | 12.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.9% | 11.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | 7.8% | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.1% | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -47.3% | 9.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.7% | 8.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.7% | 6.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.8% | 8.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.7% | 7.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.54 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.36 | $2.82 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-7.62 | $3.01 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.87 | $2.77 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.40 | $2.10 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.25 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.13 | $2.68 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.28 | $2.37 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $801.0M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $5.3B | $4.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.2B | $4.9B |
| Total Assets | $18.2B | $13.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.65× | 0.94× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 25 | $801.0M | $974.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $810.0M | $930.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $785.0M | $842.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $902.0M | $943.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $810.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $905.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $789.0M | $823.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $4.6B | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.3B | $4.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.3B | $5.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.6B | $5.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.3B | $4.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.4B | $4.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.8B | $4.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | $4.9B | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.2B | $4.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.0B | $4.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.1B | $4.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.9B | $4.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.7B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.7B | $4.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.7B | $4.5B |
| Q1 26 | — | $13.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | $18.2B | $13.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $20.2B | $13.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $22.3B | $13.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.7B | $13.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $20.9B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $22.5B | $13.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $22.0B | $12.9B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.94× | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.65× | 0.94× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.42× | 1.07× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.28× | 1.18× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.48× | 0.92× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.37× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.57× | 0.88× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.45× | 0.92× |
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 | $1.5B | $495.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.3B | $452.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 27.2% | 10.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.6% | 1.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 14.40× | 1.51× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-30.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $495.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0M | $711.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-180.0M | $58.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-538.0M | $299.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-73.0M | $656.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-67.0M | $374.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $452.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-181.0M | $680.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-387.0M | $36.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-797.0M | $213.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-351.0M | $633.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-383.0M | $351.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 10.8% | ||
| Q4 25 | 27.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -3.9% | 16.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -8.7% | 0.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -18.7% | 4.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 20.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -7.3% | 15.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | -8.4% | 8.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | 1.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.9% | 0.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.6% | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.1% | 2.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.8% | 0.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.9% | 0.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | 1.51× | ||
| Q4 25 | 14.40× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.82× | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.71× | 0.16× | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.68× | 1.05× | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.66× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.80× | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.85× | 1.16× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GT
| Tire Unit Sales | $2.4B | 50% |
| Other | $2.3B | 46% |
| Other Tireand Related Sales | $192.0M | 4% |
LDOS
| US Do D And US Intelligence Community | $1.4B | 32% |
| Cost Reimbursement And Fixed Price Incentive Fee | $1.0B | 24% |
| Commercial And International Segment | $609.0M | 15% |
| Defense Systems Segment | $546.0M | 13% |
| Other | $358.0M | 9% |
| Time And Materials And Fixed Price Level Of Effort | $295.0M | 7% |
| Commercial And Non US Customers | $38.0M | 1% |
