vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of HUTCHMED (China) Ltd (HCM) and LA-Z-BOY INC (LZB). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LA-Z-BOY INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($541.6M vs $270.8M, roughly 2.0× HUTCHMED (China) Ltd). LA-Z-BOY INC runs the higher net margin — 4.0% vs 0.7%, a 3.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, LA-Z-BOY INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (3.8% vs -16.5%). LA-Z-BOY INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($71.6M vs $3.4M).
HUTCHMED (China) LtdHCMEarnings & Financial Report
HUTCHMED (China) Ltd is a biopharmaceutical firm focused on discovering, developing and commercializing targeted and immunotherapies for oncology and immunological diseases. It operates across China and global markets, with multiple marketed oncology drugs and a robust pipeline of late-stage clinical candidates addressing unmet patient needs.
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.
HCM vs LZB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $270.8M | $541.6M |
| Net Profit | $2.0M | $21.6M |
| Gross Margin | 37.7% | 43.1% |
| Operating Margin | -13.2% | 5.5% |
| Net Margin | 0.7% | 4.0% |
| Revenue YoY | -16.5% | 3.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -83.6% | -23.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.00 | $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.
| Q1 26 | — | $541.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $270.8M | $522.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $492.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $277.7M | $570.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $324.5M | $521.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $521.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $495.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $305.7M | $553.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | $21.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.0M | $28.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $18.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $455.0M | $14.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.9M | $28.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $30.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $26.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.8M | $39.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | 43.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | 37.7% | 44.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 42.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.1% | 44.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 48.0% | 44.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 44.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 43.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 41.1% | 43.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | 5.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | -13.2% | 6.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -1.3% | 5.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -5.0% | 6.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 6.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | -9.0% | 9.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | 4.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.7% | 5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 163.8% | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.7% | 5.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 5.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 5.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.4% | 7.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.52 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.00 | $0.70 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.44 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.52 | $0.35 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.01 | $0.68 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.71 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.61 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.03 | $0.91 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.4B | $306.1M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $93.2M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.2B | $1.0B |
| Total Assets | $1.8B | $2.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.08× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $306.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.4B | $338.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $318.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $328.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $836.1M | $314.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $303.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $342.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $802.5M | $341.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $93.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $93.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $82.8M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $82.1M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $759.9M | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $999.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $740.1M | $1.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.8B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | $2.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $1.9B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.08× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.08× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.11× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.11× | — |
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 | $8.2M | $89.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $3.4M | $71.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 1.2% | 13.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.8% | 3.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 4.21× | 4.13× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-96.2M | $158.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $89.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | $8.2M | $50.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $36.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-72.9M | $62.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $40.3M | $57.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $15.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $52.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-39.8M | $52.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | $71.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.4M | $29.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $17.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-82.2M | $39.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $32.5M | $38.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-1.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $36.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-49.9M | $37.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | 13.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.2% | 5.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -29.6% | 6.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.0% | 7.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -0.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 7.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | -16.3% | 6.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.8% | 3.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.3% | 4.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.4% | 3.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.3% | 2.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 4.13× | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.21× | 1.73× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.99× | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.16× | 4.15× | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.38× | 2.01× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.53× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.00× | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.54× | 1.34× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
HCM
Segment breakdown not available.
LZB
| Stationary Upholstery Furniture | $286.2M | 53% |
| Retail Segment | $251.9M | 47% |
