vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LendingClub Corp (LC) and Piedmont Realty Trust, Inc. (PDM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LendingClub Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($252.3M vs $143.3M, roughly 1.8× Piedmont Realty Trust, Inc.). LendingClub Corp runs the higher net margin — 20.5% vs -31.4%, a 51.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, LendingClub Corp posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (15.9% vs 0.4%). Over the past eight quarters, LendingClub Corp's revenue compounded faster (16.1% CAGR vs 0.0%).
LendingClub Corporation is an American financial services company headquartered in San Francisco, California. It was the first peer-to-peer lender to register its offerings as securities with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and to offer loan trading on a secondary market. At its height, LendingClub was the world's largest peer-to-peer lending platform. The company reported that $15.98 billion in loans had been originated through its platform up to December 31, 2015.
Piedmont Realty Trust, Inc. is a publicly traded real estate investment trust (REIT) that owns, operates, and invests in high-quality office properties primarily located in high-growth metropolitan areas across the United States. It serves corporate tenants across multiple industry sectors including technology, professional services, and healthcare, and pursues stable long-term returns for stakeholders via strategic property management and portfolio optimization.
LC vs PDM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $252.3M | $143.3M |
| Net Profit | $51.6M | $-45.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | — |
| Net Margin | 20.5% | -31.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 15.9% | 0.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 341.0% | -27.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.44 | $-0.10 |
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 | $252.3M | $143.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $266.5M | $142.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $266.2M | $139.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $248.4M | $140.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $217.7M | $142.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $217.2M | $143.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $201.9M | $139.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $187.2M | $143.3M |
| Q1 26 | $51.6M | $-45.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-43.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $44.3M | $-13.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.2M | $-16.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.7M | $-10.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-30.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.5M | $-11.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.9M | $-9.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 18.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 21.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.4% | — |
| Q1 26 | 20.5% | -31.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -30.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.6% | -9.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.4% | -12.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.4% | -7.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -20.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.2% | -8.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.0% | -6.8% |
| Q1 26 | $0.44 | $-0.10 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.36 | $-0.34 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.37 | $-0.11 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.33 | $-0.14 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.10 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.08 | $-0.25 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.13 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.13 | $-0.08 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $2.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.5B | $1.5B |
| Total Assets | $11.9B | $4.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $2.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $731.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $3.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $109.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $133.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $138.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0 | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $0 | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $0 | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $0 | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $0 | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.2B |
| Q1 26 | $1.5B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $1.7B |
| Q1 26 | $11.9B | $4.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | $11.6B | $4.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.1B | $4.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.8B | $4.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.5B | $4.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.6B | $4.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.0B | $4.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.6B | $4.2B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.00× | 1.49× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.00× | 1.43× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.00× | 1.41× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.00× | 1.40× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.00× | 1.40× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.36× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.34× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
