vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LEAR CORP (LEA) and TECK RESOURCES LTD (TECK). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
TECK RESOURCES LTD is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($6.3B vs $5.8B, roughly 1.1× LEAR CORP).
Lear Corporation is an American company that manufactures automotive seating and electrical systems. In 2019, it ranked #147 and in 2018, it ranked #148 on the Fortune 500 list.
Teck Resources Limited is a diversified natural resources company headquartered in Vancouver, British Columbia, that is engaged in mining and mineral development, including coal for the steelmaking industry, copper, zinc, and energy. Secondary products include lead, silver, gold, molybdenum, germanium, indium and cadmium. Teck Resources was formed from the amalgamation of Teck and Cominco in 2001.
LEA vs TECK — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $5.8B | $6.3B |
| Net Profit | $172.3M | — |
| Gross Margin | 7.7% | 17.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | -3.0% |
| Net Margin | 3.0% | — |
| Revenue YoY | 4.7% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 113.5% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $3.34 | — |
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 | $5.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.7B | $6.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.0B | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.6B | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.7B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.6B | $4.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.0B | $7.3B |
| Q1 26 | $172.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $82.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $108.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $165.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $80.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $88.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $135.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $173.1M | — |
| Q1 26 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.4% | 17.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.3% | 17.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | 10.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.3% | 20.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.5% | 42.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.4% | -3.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.1% | -3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.3% | -2.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.3% | 39.8% |
| Q1 26 | 3.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | $3.34 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.58 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.02 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.06 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.49 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.64 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.41 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.02 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $881.9M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $2.7B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $5.3B | — |
| Total Assets | $15.5B | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.52× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $881.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $887.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $779.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $763.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $950.3M | — |
| Q1 26 | $2.7B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.7B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.8B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.7B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.7B | — |
| Q1 26 | $5.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.1B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.5B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.8B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.8B | — |
| Q1 26 | $15.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $14.8B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.3B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $14.6B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.0B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.8B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.7B | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.52× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.54× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.54× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.54× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.59× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.61× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.58× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.57× | — |
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 | $98.1M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-26.5M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -0.5% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.1% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.57× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $732.4M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $98.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $475.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $444.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $296.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-127.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $680.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $182.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $291.2M | — |
| Q1 26 | $-26.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $281.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $307.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $170.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-231.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $488.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $50.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $170.4M | — |
| Q1 26 | -0.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.8% | — |
| Q1 26 | 2.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.0% | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.57× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.75× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.11× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.79× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.58× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.73× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.35× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.68× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LEA
| Seating | $4.4B | 76% |
| E-Systems | $1.4B | 24% |
TECK
Segment breakdown not available.
