vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LEGGETT & PLATT INC (LEG) and Sleep Number Corp (SNBR), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LEGGETT & PLATT INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($938.6M vs $342.9M, roughly 2.7× Sleep Number Corp). LEGGETT & PLATT INC runs the higher net margin — 2.7% vs -11.6%, a 14.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, LEGGETT & PLATT INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-11.2% vs -19.6%). LEGGETT & PLATT INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($101.9M vs $-10.2M). Over the past eight quarters, LEGGETT & PLATT INC's revenue compounded faster (-7.5% CAGR vs -10.7%).
Leggett & Platt (L&P), based in Carthage, Missouri, is an American diversified manufacturer that designs and produces various engineered components and products that can be found in homes and automobiles. The firm was founded in 1883, and consists of 15 business units, 20,000 employee-partners, and 135 manufacturing facilities located in 18 countries.
Sleep Number Corporation is an American manufacturer that makes the Sleep Number and Comfortaire beds as well as foundations and bedding accessories. The company is based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. In addition to its Minnesota headquarters, Sleep Number has manufacturing and distribution facilities in South Carolina and Utah.
LEG vs SNBR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q3 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $938.6M | $342.9M |
| Net Profit | $25.1M | $-39.8M |
| Gross Margin | 17.9% | 59.9% |
| Operating Margin | 2.0% | -11.8% |
| Net Margin | 2.7% | -11.6% |
| Revenue YoY | -11.2% | -19.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | 76.8% | -1168.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.18 | $-1.73 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $938.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $342.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $327.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $393.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $376.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $426.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $408.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | $470.4M |
| Q4 25 | $25.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $127.1M | $-39.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $52.5M | $-25.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $30.6M | $-8.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.2M | $-4.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $44.9M | $-3.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-602.2M | $-5.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $31.6M | $-7.5M |
| Q4 25 | 17.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.7% | 59.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.2% | 59.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.6% | 61.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.6% | 59.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.2% | 60.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.5% | 59.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 17.0% | 58.7% |
| Q4 25 | 2.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.9% | -11.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.8% | -0.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.4% | 0.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.4% | 0.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.2% | 2.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -56.2% | 1.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.9% | 1.2% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.3% | -11.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.0% | -7.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.0% | -2.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.3% | -1.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.1% | -0.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -53.4% | -1.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.9% | -1.6% |
| Q4 25 | $0.18 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.91 | $-1.73 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.38 | $-1.09 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.22 | $-0.38 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.10 | $-0.21 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.33 | $-0.14 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-4.39 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.23 | $-0.33 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $587.4M | $1.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.5B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.0B | $-521.3M |
| Total Assets | $3.5B | $749.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.46× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $587.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $460.7M | $1.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $368.8M | $1.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $412.6M | $1.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $350.2M | $1.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $277.2M | $1.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $307.0M | $2.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $361.3M | $2.1M |
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.8B | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $971.8M | $-521.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $855.0M | $-480.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $746.8M | $-456.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $689.4M | $-451.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $741.0M | $-448.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $667.6M | $-447.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.3B | $-445.9M |
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.5B | $749.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.7B | $804.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7B | $836.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7B | $860.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.8B | $864.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.8B | $883.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.6B | $908.5M |
| Q4 25 | 1.46× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.54× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.10× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.59× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.70× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.13× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.55× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.38× | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $121.5M | $-6.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $101.9M | $-10.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 10.9% | -3.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 2.1% | 1.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 4.84× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $281.0M | $-47.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $121.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $125.9M | $-6.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $84.0M | $3.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.8M | $-2.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $122.3M | $-23.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $95.5M | $27.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $94.0M | $-10.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-6.1M | $33.7M |
| Q4 25 | $101.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $110.1M | $-10.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $75.5M | $369.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $-6.5M | $-7.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $100.5M | $-30.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $77.1M | $24.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $78.5M | $-15.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-32.0M | $24.4M |
| Q4 25 | 10.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.6% | -3.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.1% | 0.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.6% | -1.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.5% | -8.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.0% | 5.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.0% | -3.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.9% | 5.2% |
| Q4 25 | 2.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.5% | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | 1.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.3% | 1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.1% | 1.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.7% | 0.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.4% | 1.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.4% | 2.0% |
| Q4 25 | 4.84× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.99× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.60× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.22× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.61× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.13× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.19× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LEG
| Bedding Products | $373.8M | 40% |
| Flooring And Textile Products Group | $196.9M | 21% |
| Automotive Group | $194.9M | 21% |
| Work Furniture Group | $66.2M | 7% |
| Home Furniture Group | $61.0M | 6% |
| Hydraulic Cylinders | $45.8M | 5% |
SNBR
| Retail Channel | $301.2M | 88% |
| Online Phone Chat And Other | $41.7M | 12% |
