vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of LXP Industrial Trust (LXP) and PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. (PBYI). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LXP Industrial Trust is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($86.7M vs $75.5M, roughly 1.1× PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC.). On growth, PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (27.7% vs -14.0%). Over the past eight quarters, PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC.'s revenue compounded faster (31.3% CAGR vs 0.3%).
LXP Industrial Trust is a publicly traded real estate investment trust (REIT) that owns, operates, and invests in high-quality industrial real estate assets, primarily distribution centers, logistics facilities, and light industrial properties across key markets in the United States. Its tenant base covers e-commerce, third-party logistics, and advanced manufacturing sectors, delivering stable long-term returns for its investors.
Puma Biotechnology is a publicly traded biopharmaceutical company headquartered in Los Angeles, CA.
LXP vs PBYI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $86.7M | $75.5M |
| Net Profit | $28.8M | — |
| Gross Margin | 81.5% | 69.3% |
| Operating Margin | 34.6% | 22.7% |
| Net Margin | 33.2% | — |
| Revenue YoY | -14.0% | 27.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.26 |
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 | $86.7M | $75.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $86.9M | $54.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $87.7M | $52.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $88.9M | $46.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $100.9M | $59.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $85.6M | $80.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $85.8M | $47.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $86.3M | $43.8M |
| Q4 25 | $28.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $36.3M | $8.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $29.1M | $5.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $19.0M | $3.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.3M | $20.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.4M | $-4.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-269.0K | $-4.8M |
| Q4 25 | 81.5% | 69.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 82.3% | 77.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 81.9% | 76.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 80.7% | 77.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 85.3% | 76.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 82.5% | 63.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 82.0% | 77.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 82.4% | 75.5% |
| Q4 25 | 34.6% | 22.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 50.4% | 17.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 33.7% | 12.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.8% | 8.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 22.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.9% | 27.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.9% | -4.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.0% | -5.3% |
| Q4 25 | 33.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 41.7% | 16.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 33.2% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.4% | 6.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.4% | 25.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.3% | -9.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.3% | -11.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.26 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.12 | $0.17 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.09 | $0.12 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | $0.06 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.40 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.02 | $0.41 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.01 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.01 | $-0.10 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $170.4M | $97.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.4B | $22.7M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.0B | $130.3M |
| Total Assets | $3.5B | $216.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.66× | 0.17× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $170.4M | $97.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $229.7M | $94.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $71.0M | $96.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $70.9M | $93.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $101.8M | $101.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $55.0M | $96.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $48.7M | $96.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $293.8M | $107.2M |
| Q4 25 | $1.4B | $22.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $34.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.5B | $45.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.5B | $56.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $68.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $79.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $90.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $102.0M |
| Q4 25 | $2.0B | $130.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.1B | $115.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1B | $104.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.1B | $97.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.1B | $92.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.1B | $71.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.1B | $48.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.2B | $51.0M |
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | $216.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.7B | $202.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.7B | $194.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.8B | $196.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.8B | $213.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.9B | $220.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.9B | $205.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.2B | $214.1M |
| Q4 25 | 0.66× | 0.17× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.72× | 0.30× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.72× | 0.43× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.73× | 0.58× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.75× | 0.74× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.12× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.87× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.00× |
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 | $188.7M | $14.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $14.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 19.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 6.56× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $41.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $188.7M | $14.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $63.5M | $9.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $44.3M | $14.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $39.0M | $3.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $211.2M | $15.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $64.6M | $11.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $38.5M | $1.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $38.9M | $11.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $14.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $9.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $14.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $15.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $11.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 19.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 17.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 26.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 26.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 13.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.0% |
| Q4 25 | 6.56× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.75× | 1.10× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.52× | 2.41× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.05× | 1.21× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.18× | 0.54× | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.09× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
