vs

Side-by-side financial comparison of CHART INDUSTRIES INC (GTLS) and LA-Z-BOY INC (LZB). Click either name above to swap in a different company.

CHART INDUSTRIES INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.1B vs $541.6M, roughly 2.0× LA-Z-BOY INC). CHART INDUSTRIES INC runs the higher net margin — 5.0% vs 4.0%, a 1.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, LA-Z-BOY INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (3.8% vs -2.5%). LA-Z-BOY INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($71.6M vs $66.2M). Over the past eight quarters, CHART INDUSTRIES INC's revenue compounded faster (6.6% CAGR vs -1.1%).

Oricon Inc. , established in 1999, is the holding company at the head of a Japanese corporate group that supplies statistics and information on music and the music industry in Japan and Western music. It started as Original Confidence Inc. , which was founded by Sōkō Koike in November 1967 and became known for its music charts. Oricon Inc. was originally set up as a subsidiary of Original Confidence and took over the latter's Oricon record charts in April 2002.

La-Z-Boy Inc. is an American furniture manufacturer based in Monroe, Michigan, United States, that makes home furniture, including upholstered recliners, sofas, stationary chairs, lift chairs and sleeper sofas. The company employs more than 11,000 people.

GTLS vs LZB — Head-to-Head

Bigger by revenue
GTLS
GTLS
2.0× larger
GTLS
$1.1B
$541.6M
LZB
Growing faster (revenue YoY)
LZB
LZB
+6.3% gap
LZB
3.8%
-2.5%
GTLS
Higher net margin
GTLS
GTLS
1.0% more per $
GTLS
5.0%
4.0%
LZB
More free cash flow
LZB
LZB
$5.4M more FCF
LZB
$71.6M
$66.2M
GTLS
Faster 2-yr revenue CAGR
GTLS
GTLS
Annualised
GTLS
6.6%
-1.1%
LZB

Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2026

Metric
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Revenue
$1.1B
$541.6M
Net Profit
$53.6M
$21.6M
Gross Margin
33.3%
43.1%
Operating Margin
11.6%
5.5%
Net Margin
5.0%
4.0%
Revenue YoY
-2.5%
3.8%
Net Profit YoY
-32.7%
-23.8%
EPS (diluted)
$1.06
$0.52

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.

Revenue
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
$541.6M
Q4 25
$1.1B
$522.5M
Q3 25
$1.1B
$492.2M
Q2 25
$1.1B
$570.9M
Q1 25
$1.0B
$521.8M
Q4 24
$1.1B
$521.0M
Q3 24
$1.1B
$495.5M
Q2 24
$1.0B
$553.5M
Net Profit
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
$21.6M
Q4 25
$53.6M
$28.9M
Q3 25
$-138.5M
$18.2M
Q2 25
$76.1M
$14.9M
Q1 25
$49.5M
$28.4M
Q4 24
$79.6M
$30.0M
Q3 24
$69.0M
$26.2M
Q2 24
$58.6M
$39.3M
Gross Margin
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
43.1%
Q4 25
33.3%
44.2%
Q3 25
34.1%
42.5%
Q2 25
33.6%
44.0%
Q1 25
33.9%
44.3%
Q4 24
33.6%
44.3%
Q3 24
34.1%
43.1%
Q2 24
33.8%
43.4%
Operating Margin
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
5.5%
Q4 25
11.6%
6.9%
Q3 25
-8.0%
4.5%
Q2 25
15.7%
5.2%
Q1 25
15.2%
6.7%
Q4 24
17.0%
7.4%
Q3 24
16.8%
6.5%
Q2 24
16.1%
9.1%
Net Margin
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
4.0%
Q4 25
5.0%
5.5%
Q3 25
-12.6%
3.7%
Q2 25
7.0%
2.6%
Q1 25
4.9%
5.4%
Q4 24
7.2%
5.8%
Q3 24
6.5%
5.3%
Q2 24
5.6%
7.1%
EPS (diluted)
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
$0.52
Q4 25
$1.06
$0.70
Q3 25
$-3.23
$0.44
Q2 25
$1.53
$0.35
Q1 25
$0.94
$0.68
Q4 24
$1.57
$0.71
Q3 24
$1.33
$0.61
Q2 24
$1.10
$0.91

Balance Sheet & Financial Strength

Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.

Metric
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand
$366.0M
$306.1M
Total DebtLower is stronger
$3.7B
Stockholders' EquityBook value
$3.2B
$1.0B
Total Assets
$9.8B
$2.1B
Debt / EquityLower = less leverage
1.13×

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Cash + ST Investments
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
$306.1M
Q4 25
$366.0M
$338.5M
Q3 25
$399.2M
$318.5M
Q2 25
$342.3M
$328.4M
Q1 25
$296.2M
$314.6M
Q4 24
$308.6M
$303.1M
Q3 24
$310.2M
$342.3M
Q2 24
$247.4M
$341.1M
Total Debt
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
Q4 25
$3.7B
Q3 25
Q2 25
Q1 25
Q4 24
$3.8B
Q3 24
Q2 24
Stockholders' Equity
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
$1.0B
Q4 25
$3.2B
$1.0B
Q3 25
$3.2B
$1.0B
Q2 25
$3.4B
$1.0B
Q1 25
$3.0B
$1.0B
Q4 24
$2.8B
$1.0B
Q3 24
$3.0B
$999.2M
Q2 24
$2.7B
$1.0B
Total Assets
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
$2.1B
Q4 25
$9.8B
$2.0B
Q3 25
$9.8B
$1.9B
Q2 25
$9.7B
$1.9B
Q1 25
$9.3B
$2.0B
Q4 24
$9.1B
$1.9B
Q3 24
$9.5B
$1.9B
Q2 24
$9.3B
$1.9B
Debt / Equity
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
Q4 25
1.13×
Q3 25
Q2 25
Q1 25
Q4 24
1.33×
Q3 24
Q2 24

Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency

How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.

Metric
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Operating Cash FlowLast quarter
$88.8M
$89.4M
Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex
$66.2M
$71.6M
FCF MarginFCF / Revenue
6.1%
13.2%
Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue
2.1%
3.3%
Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit
1.66×
4.13×
TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters
$202.8M
$158.2M

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Operating Cash Flow
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
$89.4M
Q4 25
$88.8M
$50.0M
Q3 25
$118.0M
$36.3M
Q2 25
$145.9M
$62.0M
Q1 25
$-60.0M
$57.0M
Q4 24
$281.4M
$15.9M
Q3 24
$200.6M
$52.3M
Q2 24
$116.1M
$52.8M
Free Cash Flow
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
$71.6M
Q4 25
$66.2M
$29.6M
Q3 25
$94.7M
$17.8M
Q2 25
$122.0M
$39.3M
Q1 25
$-80.1M
$38.2M
Q4 24
$260.9M
$-1.2M
Q3 24
$174.5M
$36.7M
Q2 24
$88.0M
$37.3M
FCF Margin
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
13.2%
Q4 25
6.1%
5.7%
Q3 25
8.6%
3.6%
Q2 25
11.3%
6.9%
Q1 25
-8.0%
7.3%
Q4 24
23.6%
-0.2%
Q3 24
16.4%
7.4%
Q2 24
8.5%
6.7%
Capex Intensity
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
3.3%
Q4 25
2.1%
3.9%
Q3 25
2.1%
3.8%
Q2 25
2.2%
4.0%
Q1 25
2.0%
3.6%
Q4 24
1.9%
3.3%
Q3 24
2.5%
3.2%
Q2 24
2.7%
2.8%
Cash Conversion
GTLS
GTLS
LZB
LZB
Q1 26
4.13×
Q4 25
1.66×
1.73×
Q3 25
1.99×
Q2 25
1.92×
4.15×
Q1 25
-1.21×
2.01×
Q4 24
3.54×
0.53×
Q3 24
2.91×
2.00×
Q2 24
1.98×
1.34×

Financial Flow Comparison

Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.

Revenue Breakdown by Segment

GTLS
GTLS

Repair Service And Leasing Segment$330.4M31%
Heat Transfer Systems Segment$325.8M30%
Specialty Products Segment$259.5M24%
Transferred Over Time$94.4M9%
Transferred At Point In Time$69.5M6%

LZB
LZB

Stationary Upholstery Furniture$286.2M53%
Retail Segment$251.9M47%

Related Comparisons