vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LINCOLN ELECTRIC HOLDINGS INC (LECO) and Palantir Technologies (PLTR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Palantir Technologies is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.4B vs $1.1B, roughly 1.3× LINCOLN ELECTRIC HOLDINGS INC). Palantir Technologies runs the higher net margin — 43.3% vs 12.2%, a 31.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Palantir Technologies posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (70.0% vs 11.7%). Palantir Technologies produced more free cash flow last quarter ($764.0M vs $63.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Palantir Technologies's revenue compounded faster (48.9% CAGR vs 4.8%).
Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. is an American multinational and global manufacturer of welding products, arc welding equipment, welding accessories, plasma and oxy-fuel cutting equipment and robotic welding systems headquartered in Euclid, Ohio. It has a network of distributors and sales offices covering more than 160 countries and 42 manufacturing locations in North America, Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America. It also operates manufacturing alliances and joint ventures in 19 co...
Palantir Technologies Inc. is an American publicly traded company that develops data integration and analytics platforms enabling government agencies, militaries, and corporations to combine and analyze data from multiple sources. Its flagship products—Gotham and Foundry —connect previously siloed databases to support intelligence operations, counterterrorism analysis, law enforcement, and enterprise analytics.
LECO vs PLTR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.1B | $1.4B |
| Net Profit | $136.4M | $608.7M |
| Gross Margin | 35.6% | 84.6% |
| Operating Margin | 16.6% | 40.9% |
| Net Margin | 12.2% | 43.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.7% | 70.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 15.1% | 670.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $2.47 | $0.24 |
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 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $883.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.0B | $827.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $983.8M | $725.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0B | $678.1M |
| Q1 26 | $136.4M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $136.0M | $608.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $122.6M | $475.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $143.4M | $326.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $118.5M | $214.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $140.2M | $79.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $100.8M | $143.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $101.7M | $134.1M |
| Q1 26 | 35.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 34.7% | 84.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 36.7% | 82.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 37.3% | 80.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 36.4% | 80.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 36.1% | 78.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 35.8% | 79.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 37.6% | 81.0% |
| Q1 26 | 16.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.1% | 40.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.6% | 33.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.6% | 26.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 16.4% | 19.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.3% | 1.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.8% | 15.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.6% | 15.5% |
| Q1 26 | 12.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 12.6% | 43.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.6% | 40.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.2% | 32.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 11.8% | 24.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.7% | 9.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.2% | 19.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.0% | 19.8% |
| Q1 26 | $2.47 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.45 | $0.24 | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.21 | $0.18 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.56 | $0.13 | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.10 | $0.08 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.47 | $0.03 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.77 | $0.06 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.77 | $0.06 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $298.9M | $7.2B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.3B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.5B | $7.4B |
| Total Assets | $3.9B | $8.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.87× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $298.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $308.8M | $7.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $293.0M | $6.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $299.5M | $6.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $394.7M | $5.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $377.3M | $5.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $404.2M | $4.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $272.7M | $4.0B |
| Q1 26 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $7.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $6.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $5.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | $5.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | $5.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $4.1B |
| Q1 26 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.8B | $8.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.8B | $8.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.7B | $7.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.6B | $6.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.5B | $6.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.7B | $5.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.4B | $5.2B |
| Q1 26 | 0.87× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| 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 | $102.2M | $777.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $63.0M | $764.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 5.6% | 54.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.5% | 0.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.75× | 1.28× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $438.5M | $2.1B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $102.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $95.0M | $777.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $236.7M | $507.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $143.8M | $539.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $185.7M | $310.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $95.8M | $460.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $199.2M | $419.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $170.7M | $144.2M |
| Q1 26 | $63.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $52.0M | $764.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $205.1M | $500.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $118.4M | $531.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $158.7M | $304.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $64.3M | $457.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $163.5M | $415.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $147.5M | $141.3M |
| Q1 26 | 5.6% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.8% | 54.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.3% | 42.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.9% | 53.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 15.8% | 34.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.3% | 55.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.6% | 57.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.4% | 20.8% |
| Q1 26 | 3.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.0% | 0.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.0% | 0.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.3% | 0.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.7% | 0.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.1% | 0.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.6% | 0.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.3% | 0.4% |
| Q1 26 | 0.75× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.70× | 1.28× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.93× | 1.07× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.00× | 1.65× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.57× | 1.45× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.68× | 5.83× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.98× | 2.92× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.68× | 1.08× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LECO
Segment breakdown not available.
PLTR
| Geographic Concentration Risk | $1.1B | 77% |
| Other | $330.4M | 23% |
