vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LendingClub Corp (LC) and Seadrill Ltd (SDRL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Seadrill Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($273.0M vs $252.3M, roughly 1.1× LendingClub Corp). LendingClub Corp runs the higher net margin — 20.5% vs -3.7%, a 24.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. Over the past eight quarters, LendingClub Corp's revenue compounded faster (16.1% CAGR vs -8.9%).
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.
Seadrill is an offshore drilling contractor providing worldwide offshore drilling services to the oil and gas industry. Its primary business is the ownership and operation of drillships, semi-submersible rigs, and jack-up rigs for operations in shallow to ultra-deep water in both benign and harsh environments. It provides a contract-based service and primarily serves the oil super-majors, integrated oil and gas, state-owned national oil, and independent oil and gas companies.
LC vs SDRL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $252.3M | $273.0M |
| Net Profit | $51.6M | $-10.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -1.1% |
| Net Margin | 20.5% | -3.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 15.9% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 341.0% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.44 | — |
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 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $266.5M | $273.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $266.2M | $280.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $248.4M | $288.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $217.7M | $248.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $217.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $201.9M | $263.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $187.2M | $267.0M |
| Q1 26 | $51.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-10.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $44.3M | $-11.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.2M | $-42.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.7M | $-14.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.5M | $32.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.9M | $253.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 18.8% | -1.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.5% | 9.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 21.7% | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.2% | 7.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.9% | 17.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.4% | — |
| Q1 26 | 20.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -3.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.6% | -3.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.4% | -14.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.4% | -5.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.2% | 12.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.0% | 94.8% |
| Q1 26 | $0.44 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.36 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.37 | $-0.17 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.33 | $-0.68 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.10 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.08 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.13 | $0.49 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.13 | $3.49 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $339.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $613.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.5B | $2.9B |
| Total Assets | $11.9B | $3.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.21× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $339.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $402.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $393.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $404.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $835.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0 | $613.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $0 | $612.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $0 | $612.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $0 | $611.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $0 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $609.0M |
| Q1 26 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $2.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $3.1B |
| Q1 26 | $11.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $11.6B | $3.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.1B | $4.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.8B | $4.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.5B | $4.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.6B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.0B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.6B | $4.3B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.00× | 0.21× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.00× | 0.21× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.00× | 0.21× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.00× | 0.21× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.20× |
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 | — | $-40.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-2.7B | $-40.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-770.8M | $28.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-713.1M | $11.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-339.3M | $-27.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-2.6B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-669.8M | $-27.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-932.5M | $79.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-2.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-791.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-803.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-352.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-2.7B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-682.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-945.3M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -1076.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -297.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -323.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -161.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -1237.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -338.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -504.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 52.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 36.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -17.41× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -18.68× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -29.07× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -46.33× | -0.84× | ||
| Q2 24 | -62.57× | 0.31× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
