vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Ingram Micro Holding Corp (INGM) and XP Inc. (XP). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Ingram Micro Holding Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($14.0B vs $13.5B, roughly 1.0× XP Inc.). Ingram Micro Holding Corp runs the higher net margin — 0.7% vs 0.0%, a 0.7% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Ingram Micro Holding Corporation is an American distributor of information technology products and services. The company is based in Irvine, California, U.S. and has operations around the world. Founded as Micro D, Inc in 1979 in California by Geza Czige and Lorraine Mecca, the company, originally a traditional distributor focused on marketing, selling and shipping vendor products to resellers, is currently specializing on becoming a platform-based business that focuses on its digital experie...
XP Inc. is a Brazilian investment management company. The company offers fixed income, equities, investment funds, and private pension products, as well as offers wealth management and other financial services. XP serves customers in Brazil and has offices in São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, New York, Miami, London and Geneva.
INGM vs XP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $14.0B | $13.5B |
| Net Profit | $98.9M | $22.0K |
| Gross Margin | 6.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | 1.6% | 1.1% |
| Net Margin | 0.7% | 0.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 13.7% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 42.9% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.68 | $536884.00 |
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 | $14.0B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $14.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.6B | $13.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.8B | $8.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.3B | $4.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8B | $12.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.5B | $8.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.3B | $4.1B |
| Q1 26 | $98.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $121.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $99.5M | $22.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $37.8M | $22.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $69.2M | $22.0K | ||
| Q3 24 | $77.0M | $21.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $54.6M | $21.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $49.6M | $21.0K |
| Q1 26 | 6.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 6.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.4% | — |
| Q1 26 | 1.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.8% | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.1% | 1.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.6% | 1.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.9% | 1.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.6% | 0.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.5% | 1.0% |
| Q1 26 | 0.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.8% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.3% | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.6% | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.7% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.5% | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.4% | 0.0% |
| Q1 26 | $0.68 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.52 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.42 | $536884.00 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.16 | $537811.00 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.29 | $539533.00 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.35 | $550958.00 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.25 | $554030.00 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.22 | $556675.00 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $916.0M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.3B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $4.2B | $20.0B |
| Total Assets | $20.9B | $347.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.79× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $916.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $802.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $856.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $881.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $849.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $3.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.2B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.8B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.7B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.5B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.8B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $4.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.2B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.1B | $20.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.0B | $20.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.9B | $20.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6B | $19.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.5B | $19.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.5B | $19.5B |
| Q1 26 | $20.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $21.2B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $19.2B | $347.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $19.5B | $347.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $18.6B | $347.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.6B | $249.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $249.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $17.6B | $249.0B |
| Q1 26 | 0.79× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.75× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.93× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.92× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.90× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.06× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | — | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-962.3M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -6.9% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.3% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $53.2M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-146.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-298.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-200.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-277.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-100.3M | — |
| Q1 26 | $-962.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-175.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-333.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-230.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-315.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-135.8M | — |
| Q1 26 | -6.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 10.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.3% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 12.85× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.47× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -7.88× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.90× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -3.60× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.02× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
