vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of H2O AMERICA (HTO) and Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp (ZWS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($407.2M vs $199.4M, roughly 2.0× H2O AMERICA). Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp runs the higher net margin — 10.3% vs 8.1%, a 2.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (9.8% vs 1.5%). Over the past eight quarters, H2O AMERICA's revenue compounded faster (15.3% CAGR vs 4.4%).
H2O Wireless is a United States-based prepaid cell phone service, that utilizes the AT&T network. It is a brand of the mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) Locus Telecommunications, a subsidiary of Telrite Holdings, Inc., since 2019. Locus was formerly a subsidiary of KDDI America corporation, starting in 2010. H2O Wireless is primarily advertised as a non-restrictive phone service for customers to bring or buy unlocked smartphones, although AT&T contract/locked phones may be accepted as well.
Zurn Elkay Water Solutions Corp designs, manufactures, and distributes a wide range of water management and dispensing products, including commercial plumbing fixtures, drinking fountains, water filtration systems, and flow control components. It serves commercial, residential, industrial, and public infrastructure markets primarily across North America, with a focus on delivering sustainable, water-efficient solutions for diverse end-user needs.
HTO vs ZWS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $199.4M | $407.2M |
| Net Profit | $16.2M | $42.1M |
| Gross Margin | — | 44.4% |
| Operating Margin | 16.6% | 14.8% |
| Net Margin | 8.1% | 10.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 1.5% | 9.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -29.2% | 15.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.45 | $0.24 |
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 | $199.4M | $407.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $243.5M | $455.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $197.8M | $444.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $164.9M | $388.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $196.5M | $370.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $216.7M | $410.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $173.1M | $412.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $150.0M | $373.8M |
| Q4 25 | $16.2M | $42.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $45.1M | $61.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $24.7M | $50.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $16.6M | $43.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $22.9M | $36.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $38.7M | $43.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $20.7M | $46.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.7M | $34.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | 44.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 44.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 45.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 46.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 43.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 46.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 45.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 45.5% |
| Q4 25 | 16.6% | 14.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.5% | 17.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.2% | 17.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.8% | 16.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.2% | 13.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.9% | 17.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.4% | 17.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 18.6% | 14.2% |
| Q4 25 | 8.1% | 10.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.5% | 13.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.5% | 11.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.0% | 11.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 11.7% | 9.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.8% | 10.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.0% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.8% | 9.2% |
| Q4 25 | $0.45 | $0.24 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.27 | $0.36 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.71 | $0.29 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.49 | $0.26 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.70 | $0.21 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.17 | $0.25 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.64 | $0.27 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.36 | $0.19 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $20.7M | $300.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.9B | $496.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.5B | $1.6B |
| Total Assets | $5.1B | $2.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.23× | 0.31× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $20.7M | $300.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.3M | $260.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $19.8M | $201.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.7M | $144.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.1M | $198.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.0M | $187.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $22.8M | $162.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $157.1M |
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $496.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $496.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $495.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $495.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.7B | $495.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $495.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $495.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $495.4M |
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.5B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.2B | $1.6B |
| Q4 25 | $5.1B | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.0B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.8B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.7B | $2.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.7B | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.6B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.4B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.4B | $2.7B |
| Q4 25 | 1.23× | 0.31× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.31× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.32× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.32× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.26× | 0.31× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.31× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.31× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.31× |
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 | $63.5M | $91.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 3.92× | 2.18× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $63.5M | $91.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $77.3M | $101.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $60.8M | $110.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $43.2M | $42.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $41.5M | $63.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $53.5M | $90.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $49.3M | $85.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $51.2M | $53.9M |
| Q4 25 | 3.92× | 2.18× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.71× | 1.64× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.47× | 2.19× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.61× | 0.98× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.81× | 1.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.39× | 2.09× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.38× | 1.85× | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.38× | 1.57× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
HTO
| Water Utility Services | $191.0M | 96% |
| Other | $8.4M | 4% |
ZWS
Segment breakdown not available.
