vs

Side-by-side financial comparison of QUAKER CHEMICAL CORP (KWR) and Sensata Technologies Holding plc (ST). Click either name above to swap in a different company.

Sensata Technologies Holding plc is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($934.8M vs $468.5M, roughly 2.0× QUAKER CHEMICAL CORP). Sensata Technologies Holding plc runs the higher net margin — 9.3% vs 4.4%, a 4.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, QUAKER CHEMICAL CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (5.5% vs 2.6%). Sensata Technologies Holding plc produced more free cash flow last quarter ($104.6M vs $24.3M). Over the past eight quarters, QUAKER CHEMICAL CORP's revenue compounded faster (-0.1% CAGR vs -5.0%).

Quaker Chemical Corporation, doing business as Quaker Houghton, is an American chemical company that was founded in 1918. It is headquartered in Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. With its global presence in 21 countries and 35 locations worldwide, the company has over 50% of net sales outside of the United States. Quaker Houghton manufactures process fluids for use in the steel, aluminum, metalworking, automotive, mining, aerospace, tube & pipe, can making, and other industrial processes. On August...

Sensata Technologies Holding plc is a global industrial technology company that designs, manufactures and sells a broad portfolio of sensing, electrical protection and control solutions. Its products serve automotive, industrial, aerospace, HVAC, telecommunications and heavy vehicle end markets, catering to manufacturing and enterprise clients across the world.

KWR vs ST — Head-to-Head

Bigger by revenue
ST
ST
2.0× larger
ST
$934.8M
$468.5M
KWR
Growing faster (revenue YoY)
KWR
KWR
+2.9% gap
KWR
5.5%
2.6%
ST
Higher net margin
ST
ST
4.9% more per $
ST
9.3%
4.4%
KWR
More free cash flow
ST
ST
$80.3M more FCF
ST
$104.6M
$24.3M
KWR
Faster 2-yr revenue CAGR
KWR
KWR
Annualised
KWR
-0.1%
-5.0%
ST

Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026

Metric
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Revenue
$468.5M
$934.8M
Net Profit
$20.7M
$87.1M
Gross Margin
35.3%
30.6%
Operating Margin
6.7%
15.1%
Net Margin
4.4%
9.3%
Revenue YoY
5.5%
2.6%
Net Profit YoY
45.9%
24.6%
EPS (diluted)
$1.16
$0.59

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.

Revenue
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
$934.8M
Q4 25
$468.5M
$917.9M
Q3 25
$493.8M
$932.0M
Q2 25
$483.4M
$943.4M
Q1 25
$442.9M
$911.3M
Q4 24
$444.1M
$907.7M
Q3 24
$462.3M
$982.8M
Q2 24
$463.6M
$1.0B
Net Profit
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
$87.1M
Q4 25
$20.7M
$63.2M
Q3 25
$30.5M
$-162.5M
Q2 25
$-66.6M
$60.7M
Q1 25
$12.9M
$69.9M
Q4 24
$14.2M
$5.8M
Q3 24
$32.3M
$-25.0M
Q2 24
$34.9M
$71.7M
Gross Margin
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
30.6%
Q4 25
35.3%
29.0%
Q3 25
36.6%
27.8%
Q2 25
35.5%
30.3%
Q1 25
36.4%
29.9%
Q4 24
35.2%
27.1%
Q3 24
37.3%
28.6%
Q2 24
37.9%
30.0%
Operating Margin
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
15.1%
Q4 25
6.7%
10.9%
Q3 25
9.4%
-13.2%
Q2 25
-10.9%
14.6%
Q1 25
6.2%
13.4%
Q4 24
6.5%
8.1%
Q3 24
11.2%
-20.3%
Q2 24
12.6%
12.5%
Net Margin
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
9.3%
Q4 25
4.4%
6.9%
Q3 25
6.2%
-17.4%
Q2 25
-13.8%
6.4%
Q1 25
2.9%
7.7%
Q4 24
3.2%
0.6%
Q3 24
7.0%
-2.5%
Q2 24
7.5%
6.9%
EPS (diluted)
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
$0.59
Q4 25
$1.16
$0.45
Q3 25
$1.75
$-1.12
Q2 25
$-3.78
$0.41
Q1 25
$0.73
$0.47
Q4 24
$0.81
$0.05
Q3 24
$1.81
$-0.17
Q2 24
$1.94
$0.47

Balance Sheet & Financial Strength

Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.

Metric
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand
$179.8M
$635.1M
Total DebtLower is stronger
$834.9M
Stockholders' EquityBook value
$1.4B
$2.9B
Total Assets
$2.8B
$6.8B
Debt / EquityLower = less leverage
0.61×

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Cash + ST Investments
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
$635.1M
Q4 25
$179.8M
$573.0M
Q3 25
$172.0M
$791.3M
Q2 25
$201.9M
$661.8M
Q1 25
$186.2M
$588.1M
Q4 24
$188.9M
$593.7M
Q3 24
$212.1M
$506.2M
Q2 24
$188.6M
$1.0B
Total Debt
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
Q4 25
$834.9M
$2.8B
Q3 25
Q2 25
Q1 25
Q4 24
$669.6M
$3.2B
Q3 24
Q2 24
Stockholders' Equity
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
$2.9B
Q4 25
$1.4B
$2.8B
Q3 25
$1.4B
$2.7B
Q2 25
$1.3B
$2.9B
Q1 25
$1.4B
$2.8B
Q4 24
$1.4B
$2.9B
Q3 24
$1.4B
$3.0B
Q2 24
$1.4B
$3.0B
Total Assets
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
$6.8B
Q4 25
$2.8B
$6.8B
Q3 25
$2.8B
$7.1B
Q2 25
$2.8B
$7.3B
Q1 25
$2.7B
$7.2B
Q4 24
$2.6B
$7.1B
Q3 24
$2.7B
$7.3B
Q2 24
$2.7B
$8.2B
Debt / Equity
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
Q4 25
0.61×
1.02×
Q3 25
Q2 25
Q1 25
Q4 24
0.49×
1.11×
Q3 24
Q2 24

Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency

How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.

Metric
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Operating Cash FlowLast quarter
$46.5M
$122.5M
Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex
$24.3M
$104.6M
FCF MarginFCF / Revenue
5.2%
11.2%
Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue
4.7%
Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit
2.25×
1.41×
TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters
$80.6M
$508.3M

8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.

Operating Cash Flow
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
$122.5M
Q4 25
$46.5M
$201.5M
Q3 25
$51.4M
$159.9M
Q2 25
$41.6M
$140.9M
Q1 25
$-3.0M
$119.2M
Q4 24
$63.1M
$170.7M
Q3 24
$68.0M
$130.9M
Q2 24
$46.3M
$143.5M
Free Cash Flow
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
$104.6M
Q4 25
$24.3M
$151.9M
Q3 25
$38.0M
$136.2M
Q2 25
$33.6M
$115.5M
Q1 25
$-15.4M
$86.6M
Q4 24
$40.6M
$138.9M
Q3 24
$59.8M
$91.3M
Q2 24
$39.6M
$98.4M
FCF Margin
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
11.2%
Q4 25
5.2%
16.6%
Q3 25
7.7%
14.6%
Q2 25
7.0%
12.2%
Q1 25
-3.5%
9.5%
Q4 24
9.1%
15.3%
Q3 24
12.9%
9.3%
Q2 24
8.6%
9.5%
Capex Intensity
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
Q4 25
4.7%
5.4%
Q3 25
2.7%
2.5%
Q2 25
1.6%
2.7%
Q1 25
2.8%
3.6%
Q4 24
5.1%
3.5%
Q3 24
1.8%
4.0%
Q2 24
1.4%
4.4%
Cash Conversion
KWR
KWR
ST
ST
Q1 26
1.41×
Q4 25
2.25×
3.19×
Q3 25
1.69×
Q2 25
2.32×
Q1 25
-0.24×
1.70×
Q4 24
4.45×
29.50×
Q3 24
2.10×
Q2 24
1.33×
2.00×

Financial Flow Comparison

Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.

Revenue Breakdown by Segment

KWR
KWR

Other$260.7M56%
Metalworking And Other$146.4M31%
Metals$61.4M13%

ST
ST

Segment breakdown not available.

Related Comparisons