vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Lumentum Holdings Inc. (LITE) and Select Water Solutions, Inc. (WTTR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Lumentum Holdings Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($665.5M vs $346.5M, roughly 1.9× Select Water Solutions, Inc.). Lumentum Holdings Inc. runs the higher net margin — 11.8% vs -0.1%, a 11.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Lumentum Holdings Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (65.5% vs -0.7%). Lumentum Holdings Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($43.1M vs $-6.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Lumentum Holdings Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (34.8% CAGR vs -2.8%).
JDS Uniphase Corporation (JDSU) was an American company that designed and manufactured products for optical communications networks, communications test and measurement equipment, lasers, optical solutions for authentication and decorative applications, and other custom optics. It was headquartered in Milpitas, California. In August 2015, JDSU split into two different companies – Viavi Solutions and Lumentum Holdings.
Select Water Solutions, Inc. is a leading provider of end-to-end water management, fluid handling, and environmental sustainability services primarily catering to the North American onshore oil and gas exploration and production sector. Its core offerings include water sourcing, treatment, recycling, disposal, and chemical solutions to help clients cut operational costs and reduce environmental footprint.
LITE vs WTTR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $665.5M | $346.5M |
| Net Profit | $78.2M | $-346.0K |
| Gross Margin | 36.1% | 13.1% |
| Operating Margin | 9.7% | -0.1% |
| Net Margin | 11.8% | -0.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 65.5% | -0.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 228.4% | 78.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.89 | — |
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.
| Q4 25 | $665.5M | $346.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $533.8M | $322.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $480.7M | $364.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $425.2M | $374.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $402.2M | $349.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $336.9M | $371.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $308.3M | $365.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $366.5M | $366.5M |
| Q4 25 | $78.2M | $-346.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.2M | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $213.3M | $10.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-44.1M | $8.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-60.9M | $-1.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-82.4M | $15.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-252.5M | $12.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-127.0M | $3.6M |
| Q4 25 | 36.1% | 13.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.0% | 13.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 33.3% | 15.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 28.8% | 14.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 24.8% | 12.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.1% | 16.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.6% | 16.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 16.2% | 14.4% |
| Q4 25 | 9.7% | -0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.3% | -0.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -1.7% | 4.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -8.9% | 4.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -12.8% | 0.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -24.5% | 6.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -43.3% | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -31.3% | 1.9% |
| Q4 25 | 11.8% | -0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.8% | 0.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 44.4% | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -10.4% | 2.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -15.1% | -0.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -24.5% | 4.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -81.9% | 3.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | -34.7% | 1.0% |
| Q4 25 | $0.89 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.05 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.10 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.64 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.88 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.21 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-3.75 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.88 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.2B | $18.1M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $320.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $846.6M | $805.6M |
| Total Assets | $4.8B | $1.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.40× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $18.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $17.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $877.1M | $51.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $866.7M | $27.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $896.7M | $20.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $916.1M | $10.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $887.0M | $16.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $870.9M | $12.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $320.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $305.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $275.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $250.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $85.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $80.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $90.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $75.0M |
| Q4 25 | $846.6M | $805.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $780.8M | $808.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $799.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $879.5M | $793.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $872.3M | $793.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $895.9M | $796.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $957.3M | $782.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.2B | $770.0M |
| Q4 25 | $4.8B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.6B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.0B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.0B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.9B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.2B | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.38× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.34× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.32× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.11× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.10× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.12× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.10× |
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 | $126.7M | $65.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $43.1M | $-6.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 6.5% | -1.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 12.6% | 20.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.62× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-29.5M | $-79.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $126.7M | $65.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $57.9M | $71.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $64.0M | $82.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.6M | $-5.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $24.3M | $67.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $39.6M | $51.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $35.5M | $83.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-7.0M | $32.1M |
| Q4 25 | $43.1M | $-6.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-18.3M | $-23.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.1M | $3.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-64.4M | $-53.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-15.9M | $12.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-34.5M | $16.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.9M | $34.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-26.6M | $-1.6M |
| Q4 25 | 6.5% | -1.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | -3.4% | -7.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.1% | 0.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -15.1% | -14.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -4.0% | 3.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -10.2% | 4.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.5% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | -7.3% | -0.4% |
| Q4 25 | 12.6% | 20.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.3% | 29.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.2% | 21.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 14.8% | 12.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.0% | 15.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.0% | 9.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.0% | 13.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.3% | 9.2% |
| Q4 25 | 1.62× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.79× | 26.72× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.30× | 7.76× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -0.61× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.29× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 6.46× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 8.86× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LITE
| Components | $443.7M | 67% |
| Systems | $221.8M | 33% |
WTTR
| Water Services | $178.3M | 51% |
| Marcellus Utica | $38.6M | 11% |
| Rockies | $38.3M | 11% |
| Eagle Ford | $28.2M | 8% |
| Midcon | $23.0M | 7% |
| Haynesville E.Texas | $19.1M | 6% |
| Bakken | $17.3M | 5% |
| Eliminations And Other Geographical Regions | $3.6M | 1% |
