vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of McGraw Hill, Inc. (MH) and OLYMPIC STEEL INC (ZEUS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
OLYMPIC STEEL INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($490.7M vs $434.2M, roughly 1.1× McGraw Hill, Inc.). OLYMPIC STEEL INC runs the higher net margin — 0.4% vs -4.7%, a 5.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, OLYMPIC STEEL INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.4% vs -35.1%). McGraw Hill, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($285.4M vs $-12.9M).
McGraw Hill, Inc. is an American education science company that provides educational content, software, and services for students and educators across various levels—from K-12 to higher education and professional settings. They produce textbooks, digital learning tools, and adaptive technology to enhance learning experiences and outcomes. It is one of the "big three" educational publishers along with Houghton Mifflin Harcourt and Pearson Education. McGraw Hill also publishes reference and tra...
Olympic Steel, Inc. is a metals service center based in Cleveland, Ohio. The company processes and distributes carbon, coated and stainless flat-rolled sheet, coil and plate steel, aluminium alloy, tin plate, and metal-intensive branded products primarily in the United States. Metals processing and value added services include tempering, stretch leveling, cutting-to-length, slitting, edging, shearing, blanking, burning, forming, shot blasting, laser punching, plate rolling, fabricating, machi...
MH vs ZEUS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $434.2M | $490.7M |
| Net Profit | $-20.2M | $2.2M |
| Gross Margin | 85.3% | — |
| Operating Margin | 7.0% | 1.5% |
| Net Margin | -4.7% | 0.4% |
| Revenue YoY | -35.1% | 4.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | -119.2% | -21.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.11 | $0.18 |
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 | $434.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $669.2M | $490.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $535.7M | $496.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $492.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $418.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $470.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $526.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $526.6M |
| Q4 25 | $-20.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $105.3M | $2.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $502.0K | $5.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $7.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $8.7M |
| Q4 25 | 85.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 79.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 77.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 7.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 23.4% | 1.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.0% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 3.0% |
| Q4 25 | -4.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.7% | 0.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.1% | 1.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.7% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.11 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.57 | $0.18 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.00 | $0.45 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.21 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.33 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.23 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.66 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.75 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $514.4M | $7.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $2.6B | $240.9M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $775.3M | $579.1M |
| Total Assets | $5.6B | $1.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 3.36× | 0.42× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $514.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $463.2M | $7.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $247.3M | $14.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $13.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $11.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $11.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $9.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $10.3M |
| Q4 25 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.8B | $240.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $233.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $235.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $272.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $197.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $209.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $196.8M |
| Q4 25 | $775.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $794.6M | $579.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $283.3M | $578.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $574.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $573.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $570.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $569.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $563.0M |
| Q4 25 | $5.6B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.0B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.7B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.0B |
| Q4 25 | 3.36× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.52× | 0.42× | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.17× | 0.40× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.41× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.47× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.35× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.37× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.35× |
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 | $309.0M | $-5.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $285.4M | $-12.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 65.7% | -2.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.4% | 1.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | -2.50× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $41.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $309.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $265.0M | $-5.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-96.7M | $15.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $49.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $14.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $24.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-2.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-2.6M |
| Q4 25 | $285.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $243.8M | $-12.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-112.9M | $6.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $40.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $7.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $15.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-11.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-7.4M |
| Q4 25 | 65.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 36.4% | -2.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -21.1% | 1.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 8.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -2.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -1.4% |
| Q4 25 | 5.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | 1.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.0% | 1.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.52× | -2.50× | ||
| Q2 25 | -192.53× | 2.96× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 19.70× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 9.01× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -0.38× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -0.30× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
MH
| Higher Education | $225.4M | 52% |
| Digital | $103.5M | 24% |
| Other | $44.4M | 10% |
| Global Professional | $36.2M | 8% |
| $24.7M | 6% |
ZEUS
| Carbon Flat Products | $268.2M | 55% |
| Specialty Metals Flat Products | $140.9M | 29% |
| Tubular And Pipe Products | $81.6M | 17% |
