vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP (LSCC) and United Homes Group, Inc. (UHG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($145.8M vs $123.4M, roughly 1.2× United Homes Group, Inc.). United Homes Group, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 2.6% vs -5.2%, a 7.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (9.3% vs -8.5%). LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($44.0M vs $616.0K). Over the past eight quarters, United Homes Group, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (10.6% 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 ...
Invitation Homes Inc. is a public company traded on the New York Stock Exchange. It is headquartered in the Lincoln Center building in Dallas, Texas. Dallas B. Tanner is chief executive officer. As of 2017, the company was reportedly the largest owner of single-family rental homes in the United States. As of July 2024, the company owned about 84,000 rental homes in 16 markets. Seventeen percent of their rental income is from California.
LSCC vs UHG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $145.8M | $123.4M |
| Net Profit | $-7.6M | $3.2M |
| Gross Margin | 68.5% | 17.5% |
| Operating Margin | 30.7% | 1.3% |
| Net Margin | -5.2% | 2.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 9.3% | -8.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | 14.6% | 380.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.06 | $0.05 |
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 | — | $123.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $133.3M | $90.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $124.0M | $105.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $120.2M | $87.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $117.4M | $134.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $127.1M | $118.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $124.1M | $109.4M |
| Q1 26 | $-7.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $3.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.8M | $-31.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9M | $-6.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.0M | $18.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.5M | $667.0K | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.2M | $-7.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $22.6M | $28.6M |
| Q1 26 | 68.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 17.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 67.9% | 17.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 68.4% | 18.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 68.0% | 16.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 61.1% | 16.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 69.0% | 18.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 68.3% | 17.9% |
| Q1 26 | 0.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.2% | -1.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.8% | 1.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.8% | -2.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -10.4% | 1.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.9% | 3.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.2% | -0.0% |
| Q1 26 | -5.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.1% | -34.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.3% | -6.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.2% | 20.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.1% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.7% | -6.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.2% | 26.2% |
| Q1 26 | $-0.06 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $0.05 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.02 | $-0.53 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.02 | $-0.11 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.04 | $0.31 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.12 | $0.11 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.05 | $-0.15 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.16 | $0.50 |
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 | $24.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $67.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $714.1M | $57.4M |
| Total Assets | — | $276.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 1.18× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $133.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $24.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $117.9M | $25.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $107.2M | $36.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $127.6M | $25.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $136.3M | $22.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $124.3M | $25.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $109.2M | $24.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $67.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $67.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $67.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $67.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $67.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $714.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $57.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $706.4M | $52.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $687.0M | $82.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $707.9M | $87.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $710.9M | $66.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $703.5M | $19.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $698.8M | $25.7M |
| Q1 26 | $883.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $276.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $844.4M | $293.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $808.6M | $281.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $823.6M | $266.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $843.9M | $265.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $853.7M | $282.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $827.5M | $284.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.18× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.27× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.82× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.77× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.00× | ||
| 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 | $1.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $44.0M | $616.0K |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 30.2% | 0.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 0.44× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $153.3M | $-21.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $57.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $47.1M | $-23.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.5M | $1.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $31.9M | $1.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $45.4M | $27.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $44.0M | $7.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $21.9M | $-1.2M |
| Q1 26 | $44.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $616.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $34.0M | $-24.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $31.3M | $1.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.3M | $1.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $39.7M | $27.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $39.4M | $7.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.8M | — |
| Q1 26 | 30.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.5% | -27.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 25.2% | 1.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.4% | 1.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 33.8% | 20.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 31.0% | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | 9.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.8% | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.8% | 0.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.2% | 0.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.9% | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.7% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.8% | 0.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.44× | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.86× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.23× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.35× | 0.07× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.75× | 41.09× | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.12× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.97× | -0.04× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LSCC
Segment breakdown not available.
UHG
| GSH South Carolina | $116.3M | 94% |
| Rosewood | $5.9M | 5% |
| Other Segment | $1.1M | 1% |
