vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LAMAR ADVERTISING CO (LAMR) and ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC. (WMS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($693.4M vs $528.0M, roughly 1.3× LAMAR ADVERTISING CO). LAMAR ADVERTISING CO runs the higher net margin — 19.3% vs 13.5%, a 5.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, LAMAR ADVERTISING CO posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.5% vs 0.4%). ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($183.6M vs $152.3M). Over the past eight quarters, ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC.'s revenue compounded faster (3.0% CAGR vs -3.4%).
Lamar Advertising Company is an advertising company which operates billboards, logo signs, and transit displays in the United States and Canada. The company was founded in 1902 by Charles W. Lamar and J.M. Coe, and is headquartered in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The company has over 200 locations in the United States and Canada. They have reportedly more than 363,000 displays across the USA. Lamar Advertising Company became a real estate investment trust in 2014.
Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. (ADS) is an American company that designs, manufactures and markets polypropylene and polyethylene pipes, plastic leach field chambers and systems, septic tanks and accessories, storm retention/detention and septic chambers, polyvinyl chloride drainage structures, fittings, and water filters and water separators. It is the largest maker of high-density polyethylene pipe in the United States. It is headquartered in Hilliard, Ohio. In 2020, 93% of the company's s...
LAMR vs WMS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $528.0M | $693.4M |
| Net Profit | $101.8M | $93.6M |
| Gross Margin | — | 37.4% |
| Operating Margin | 27.7% | 19.7% |
| Net Margin | 19.3% | 13.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 4.5% | 0.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | -26.9% | 15.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.00 | $1.19 |
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 | $528.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $595.9M | $693.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $585.5M | $850.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $579.3M | $829.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $505.4M | $615.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $579.6M | $690.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $564.1M | $782.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $565.3M | $815.3M |
| Q1 26 | $101.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $152.3M | $93.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $141.8M | $156.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $154.4M | $143.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $138.8M | $77.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.2M | $81.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $147.5M | $130.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $137.4M | $161.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 67.7% | 37.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 67.9% | 40.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 67.8% | 39.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 64.4% | 36.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 67.8% | 35.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 67.6% | 37.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 67.6% | 40.8% |
| Q1 26 | 27.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 32.9% | 19.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 32.3% | 26.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 34.1% | 24.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 37.8% | 19.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.3% | 18.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 33.1% | 23.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 32.6% | 27.7% |
| Q1 26 | 19.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 25.6% | 13.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.2% | 18.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.6% | 17.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 27.5% | 12.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.2% | 11.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.1% | 16.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 24.3% | 19.8% |
| Q1 26 | $1.00 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.50 | $1.19 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.40 | $1.99 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.52 | $1.84 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.35 | $0.99 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.02 | $1.04 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.44 | $1.67 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.34 | $2.06 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $39.3M | $1.0B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $981.7M | $1.9B |
| Total Assets | $6.9B | $4.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $39.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $64.8M | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.0M | $812.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $55.7M | $638.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $36.1M | $463.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $49.5M | $488.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $29.5M | $613.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $77.9M | $541.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $981.7M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $1.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $906.9M | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | $1.3B |
| Q1 26 | $6.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.9B | $4.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.8B | $4.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.7B | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.5B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.6B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.5B | $3.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.6B | $3.4B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.83× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| 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 | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | — | $269.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $152.3M | $183.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 28.9% | 26.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 6.3% | 12.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 2.88× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $737.7M | $577.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $271.2M | $269.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $235.7M | $234.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $229.5M | $275.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $127.7M | $41.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $279.3M | $189.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $227.4M | $166.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $256.3M | $183.4M |
| Q1 26 | $152.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $208.3M | $183.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $185.8M | $176.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $191.3M | $222.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $97.9M | $-5.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $236.3M | $135.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $197.3M | $112.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $233.7M | $125.7M |
| Q1 26 | 28.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 35.0% | 26.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 31.7% | 20.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 33.0% | 26.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.4% | -0.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 40.8% | 19.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 35.0% | 14.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 41.3% | 15.4% |
| Q1 26 | 6.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 10.5% | 12.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.5% | 6.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.6% | 6.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.9% | 7.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.4% | 7.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.3% | 7.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 7.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.78× | 2.88× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.66× | 1.51× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.49× | 1.91× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.92× | 0.53× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.34× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.54× | 1.28× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.87× | 1.14× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LAMR
Segment breakdown not available.
WMS
| Reportable Segment Aggregation Before Other Operating Segment | $557.3M | 80% |
| Other | $85.5M | 12% |
| Pipe | $35.5M | 5% |
| Allied Products And Other | $15.0M | 2% |
