vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP (LSCC) and DOUGLAS DYNAMICS, INC (PLOW). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
DOUGLAS DYNAMICS, INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($184.5M vs $145.8M, roughly 1.3× LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP). DOUGLAS DYNAMICS, INC runs the higher net margin — 7.0% vs -5.2%, a 12.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, DOUGLAS DYNAMICS, INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (28.6% vs 9.3%). DOUGLAS DYNAMICS, INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($92.8M vs $44.0M). Over the past eight quarters, DOUGLAS DYNAMICS, INC's revenue compounded faster (38.9% CAGR vs 8.4%).
Lattice Semiconductor Corporation is an American semiconductor company specializing in the design and manufacturing of low power field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). Headquartered in the Silicon Forest area of Hillsboro, Oregon, the company also has operations in San Jose, Calif., Shanghai, Manila, Penang, and Singapore. Lattice Semiconductor has more than 1000 employees and an annual revenue of more than $660 million as of 2022. The company was founded in 1983 and went public in 1989. It ...
General Dynamics Corporation (GD) is an American industrial and technology company based in Reston, Virginia. It is primarily a developer and producer of advanced military equipment of a wide variety, such as nuclear submarines, main battle tanks, and armoured fighting vehicles. It is also the manufacturer of the civilian aviation Gulfstream business jets and a provider of information technology services. The company is the 3rd largest of the top 100 contractors of the U.S. federal government...
LSCC vs PLOW — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $145.8M | $184.5M |
| Net Profit | $-7.6M | $12.8M |
| Gross Margin | 68.5% | 26.1% |
| Operating Margin | 30.7% | 10.5% |
| Net Margin | -5.2% | 7.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 9.3% | 28.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | 14.6% | 62.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.06 | $0.54 |
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 | $145.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $184.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $133.3M | $162.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $124.0M | $194.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $120.2M | $115.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $117.4M | $143.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $127.1M | $129.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $124.1M | $199.9M |
| Q1 26 | $-7.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $12.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.8M | $8.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9M | $26.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.0M | $148.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.5M | $7.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.2M | $32.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $22.6M | $24.3M |
| Q1 26 | 68.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 26.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 67.9% | 23.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 68.4% | 31.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 68.0% | 24.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 61.1% | 24.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 69.0% | 23.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 68.3% | 30.7% |
| Q1 26 | 0.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 10.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.2% | 8.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.8% | 19.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.8% | 2.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -10.4% | 9.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.9% | 35.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.2% | 18.2% |
| Q1 26 | -5.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.1% | 4.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.3% | 13.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.2% | 0.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.1% | 5.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.7% | 24.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.2% | 12.2% |
| Q1 26 | $-0.06 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $0.54 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.02 | $0.33 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.02 | $1.09 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.04 | $0.00 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.12 | $0.35 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.05 | $1.36 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.16 | $1.02 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $133.9M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $144.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $714.1M | $281.4M |
| Total Assets | — | $626.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.51× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $133.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $117.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $107.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $127.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $136.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $124.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $109.2M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $144.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $147.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $714.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $281.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $706.4M | $275.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $687.0M | $273.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $707.9M | $258.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $710.9M | $264.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $703.5M | $260.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $698.8M | $236.7M |
| Q1 26 | $883.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $626.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $844.4M | $694.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $808.6M | $671.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $823.6M | $621.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $843.9M | $590.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $853.7M | $665.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $827.5M | $617.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.51× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.56× | ||
| 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 | $57.6M | $95.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $44.0M | $92.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 30.2% | 50.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.7% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 7.47× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $153.3M | $63.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $57.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $95.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $47.1M | $-8.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.5M | $-11.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $31.9M | $-1.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $45.4M | $74.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $44.0M | $-14.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $21.9M | $2.5M |
| Q1 26 | $44.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $92.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $34.0M | $-11.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $31.3M | $-14.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.3M | $-3.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $39.7M | $70.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $39.4M | $-15.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.8M | $836.0K |
| Q1 26 | 30.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 50.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.5% | -7.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 25.2% | -7.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.4% | -3.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 33.8% | 48.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 31.0% | -11.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.9% | 0.4% |
| Q1 26 | 9.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.8% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.8% | 1.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.2% | 1.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.9% | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.7% | 0.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.8% | 0.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 7.47× | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.86× | -1.07× | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.23× | -0.44× | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.35× | -9.03× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.75× | 9.41× | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.12× | -0.44× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.97× | 0.10× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LSCC
Segment breakdown not available.
PLOW
| Work Truck Solutions | $101.5M | 55% |
| Transferred At Point In Time | $83.1M | 45% |
