vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Ingersoll Rand (IR) and Parker Hannifin (PH), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Parker Hannifin is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($5.2B vs $2.1B, roughly 2.5× Ingersoll Rand). On growth, Ingersoll Rand posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (10.1% vs 9.1%). Parker Hannifin produced more free cash flow last quarter ($768.0M vs $461.5M). Over the past eight quarters, Ingersoll Rand's revenue compounded faster (11.9% CAGR vs 1.0%).
Ingersoll Rand Inc. is an American multinational company that provides flow creation and industrial products. The company was formed in February 2020 through the spinoff of the industrial segment of Ingersoll-Rand plc and its merger with Gardner Denver. Its products are sold under more than 40 brands across all major global markets.
Parker-Hannifin Corporation, originally Parker Appliance Company, usually referred to as just Parker, is an American corporation specializing in motion and control technologies. Its corporate headquarters are in Mayfield Heights, Ohio, in Greater Cleveland.
IR vs PH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q2 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.1B | $5.2B |
| Net Profit | $266.1M | — |
| Gross Margin | 42.6% | 37.3% |
| Operating Margin | 18.7% | 22.8% |
| Net Margin | 12.7% | — |
| Revenue YoY | 10.1% | 9.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 15.8% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.67 | $6.60 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $2.1B | $5.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $5.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $5.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $5.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | $4.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $4.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8B | $5.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7B | $5.1B |
| Q4 25 | $266.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $244.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-115.3M | $923.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $186.5M | $961.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $229.8M | $948.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $221.6M | $698.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $185.0M | $785.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $202.2M | $726.7M |
| Q4 25 | 42.6% | 37.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 43.7% | 37.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 43.7% | 37.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 44.6% | 36.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 42.9% | 36.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 43.8% | 36.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 43.9% | 35.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 44.7% | 35.4% |
| Q4 25 | 18.7% | 22.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.2% | 23.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.0% | 22.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 17.6% | 22.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 20.0% | 20.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.1% | 21.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.1% | 21.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 17.6% | 20.4% |
| Q4 25 | 12.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.1% | 17.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.9% | 19.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.1% | 20.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.9% | 14.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.2% | 15.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 12.1% | 14.3% |
| Q4 25 | $0.67 | $6.60 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.61 | $6.29 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.29 | $7.16 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.46 | $7.37 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.57 | $7.25 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.54 | $5.34 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.45 | $6.06 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.50 | $5.56 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.2B | $427.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $4.8B | $7.5B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $10.1B | $14.3B |
| Total Assets | $18.3B | $30.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.47× | 0.52× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $427.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $473.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $467.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | $408.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5B | $395.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | $371.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $422.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.5B | $415.5M |
| Q4 25 | $4.8B | $7.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.8B | $7.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.8B | $7.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.8B | $7.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.8B | $6.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.8B | $6.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.8B | $7.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.7B | $7.3B |
| Q4 25 | $10.1B | $14.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.1B | $13.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.1B | $13.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.5B | $13.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.2B | $13.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $10.3B | $12.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.0B | $12.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.9B | $11.6B |
| Q4 25 | $18.3B | $30.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.2B | $30.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.1B | $29.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $18.4B | $28.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $18.0B | $28.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.2B | $29.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.8B | $29.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $15.5B | $29.6B |
| Q4 25 | 0.47× | 0.52× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.47× | 0.54× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.47× | 0.55× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.45× | 0.55× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.47× | 0.51× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.47× | 0.52× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.48× | 0.59× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.27× | 0.63× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $499.0M | $862.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $461.5M | $768.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 22.1% | 14.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 1.8% | 1.8% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.88× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.2B | $3.3B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $499.0M | $862.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $354.6M | $782.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $245.7M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $256.4M | $630.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $526.2M | $934.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $404.0M | $744.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $304.9M | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $161.6M | $795.1M |
| Q4 25 | $461.5M | $768.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $325.5M | $693.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $210.4M | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $222.7M | $542.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $490.9M | $813.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $374.3M | $648.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $283.1M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $99.3M | $715.9M |
| Q4 25 | 22.1% | 14.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.6% | 13.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.1% | 25.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.0% | 10.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.9% | 17.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.1% | 13.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.7% | 21.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.9% | 14.1% |
| Q4 25 | 1.8% | 1.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.5% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.9% | 2.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.0% | 1.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.9% | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.6% | 1.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.2% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.7% | 1.6% |
| Q4 25 | 1.88× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.45× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.59× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.37× | 0.66× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.29× | 0.99× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.82× | 1.07× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.65× | 1.58× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.80× | 1.09× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
IR
| Transferred At Point In Time | $1.5B | 71% |
| Transferred Over Time | $193.0M | 9% |
| Precision And Science Technologies Segment | $183.1M | 9% |
| Acquisitions In2024 | $175.6M | 8% |
| Acquisitions In2025 | $70.8M | 3% |
PH
| Filtration And Engineered Materials | $1.5B | 28% |
| Other | $1.1B | 22% |
| Motion Systems | $893.0M | 17% |
| Commercial Aftermarket | $619.0M | 12% |
| Commercial Original Equipment Manufacturer | $561.0M | 11% |
| Defense Original Equipment Manufacturer | $305.0M | 6% |
| Defense Aftermarket | $221.0M | 4% |
