vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. (IBKR) and PIPER SANDLER COMPANIES (PIPR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($667.0M vs $667.0M, roughly 1.0× PIPER SANDLER COMPANIES). Interactive Brokers Group, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 180.1% vs 17.1%, a 163.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, PIPER SANDLER COMPANIES posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (37.4% vs 19.5%). Over the past eight quarters, PIPER SANDLER COMPANIES's revenue compounded faster (39.2% CAGR vs 23.4%).
Interactive Brokers, Inc. is an American multinational brokerage firm headquartered in Greenwich, Connecticut. It operates the largest electronic trading platform in the United States by number of daily average revenue trades. In 2024, the platform processed an average of 2.6 million trades per trading day. Interactive Brokers is the largest foreign exchange market broker and is one of the largest prime brokers servicing commodity brokers. The company brokers stocks, options, futures contract...
Piper Sandler Companies is an American multinational investment bank and financial services company, focused on mergers and acquisitions, financial restructuring, public offerings, public finance, institutional brokerage, investment management, and securities research. Through its principal subsidiary, Piper Sandler & Co., the company targets corporations, institutional investors, and public entities.
IBKR vs PIPR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $667.0M | $667.0M |
| Net Profit | $1.2B | $114.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 28.3% |
| Net Margin | 180.1% | 17.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 19.5% | 37.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 23.9% | 65.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.82 | $6.41 |
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 | $667.0M | $667.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $603.0M | $480.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $578.0M | $398.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $592.0M | $358.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $558.0M | $485.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $507.0M | $360.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $474.0M | $340.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $438.0M | $344.4M |
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $114.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $60.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0B | $42.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $964.0M | $64.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $969.0M | $69.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $834.0M | $34.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $809.0M | $34.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $795.0M | $42.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | 28.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 22.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 12.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 8.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 16.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 15.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 8.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 15.2% |
| Q4 25 | 180.1% | 17.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 196.7% | 12.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 174.0% | 10.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 162.8% | 18.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 173.7% | 14.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 164.5% | 9.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 170.7% | 10.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 181.5% | 12.3% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.82 | $6.41 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.59 | $3.38 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.51 | $2.38 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.94 | $3.65 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.00 | $3.88 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.67 | $1.96 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.65 | $1.97 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.61 | $2.43 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $5.0B | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $5.4B | $1.4B |
| Total Assets | $203.2B | $2.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $5.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.7B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.5B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.6B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.1B | — |
| Q4 25 | $5.4B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.1B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.8B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.5B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.9B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.7B | $1.1B |
| Q4 25 | $203.2B | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $200.2B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $181.5B | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $157.7B | $1.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $150.1B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $148.5B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $136.6B | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $132.2B | $1.8B |
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 | $1.6B | $729.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.34× | 6.40× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | $729.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.5B | $31.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.1B | $32.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.6B | $-207.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.8B | $163.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6B | $80.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6B | $266.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7B | $-197.2M |
| Q4 25 | 1.34× | 6.40× | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.78× | 0.53× | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.10× | 0.76× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.68× | -3.19× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.90× | 2.37× | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.29× | 2.30× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.00× | 7.66× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.12× | -4.64× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
IBKR
| Commissions | $582.0M | 87% |
| Risk Exposure Fees | $21.0M | 3% |
| Market Data Fees | $20.0M | 3% |
| Payments For Order Flow | $17.0M | 3% |
| Other | $17.0M | 3% |
| Fdic Sweep Fees | $10.0M | 1% |
PIPR
| Advisory Services | $402.6M | 60% |
| Equities Financing | $66.7M | 10% |
| Equity Salesand Trading | $64.2M | 10% |
| Fixed Income Salesand Trading | $47.9M | 7% |
| Other | $46.7M | 7% |
| Debt Financing | $38.9M | 6% |
