vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of M&T Bank (MTB) and Teradyne (TER). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
M&T Bank is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.5B vs $1.3B, roughly 1.9× Teradyne). Teradyne runs the higher net margin — 31.1% vs 30.7%, a 0.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Teradyne posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (87.0% vs 3.8%). Over the past eight quarters, Teradyne's revenue compounded faster (32.6% CAGR vs 4.6%).
M&T Bank Corporation is an American bank holding company headquartered in Buffalo, New York. It operates 950+ branches in 12 states and Washington D.C. across the Eastern United States, from Maine to Virginia. Until May 1998, the bank's holding company was named First Empire State Corporation.
Teradyne, Inc. is an American automatic test equipment (ATE) designer and manufacturer based in North Reading, Massachusetts. Its high-profile customers include Samsung, Qualcomm, Intel, Analog Devices, Texas Instruments and IBM.
MTB vs TER — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.5B | $1.3B |
| Net Profit | $759.0M | $398.9M |
| Gross Margin | — | 60.9% |
| Operating Margin | 39.2% | 36.9% |
| Net Margin | 30.7% | 31.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 3.8% | 87.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 11.5% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $4.62 | $2.53 |
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 | — | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.5B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5B | $769.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.4B | $651.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.3B | $685.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.4B | $752.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.3B | $737.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.3B | $729.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | $398.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | $759.0M | $257.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $792.0M | $119.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $716.0M | $78.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $584.0M | $98.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $681.0M | $146.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $721.0M | $145.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $655.0M | $186.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | 60.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 57.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 58.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 57.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 60.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 59.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 59.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 58.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | 36.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | 39.2% | 27.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 40.8% | 18.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 39.0% | 13.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 33.0% | 17.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 37.0% | 20.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 39.0% | 20.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 37.1% | 28.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 31.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | 30.7% | 23.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 31.5% | 15.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 29.9% | 12.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 25.3% | 14.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 28.6% | 19.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 30.9% | 19.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 28.5% | 25.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.53 | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.62 | $1.62 | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.82 | $0.75 | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.24 | $0.49 | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.32 | $0.61 | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.87 | $0.89 | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.02 | $0.89 | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.73 | $1.14 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $241.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $10.9B | $0 |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $29.2B | — |
| Total Assets | $213.5B | $4.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.37× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $241.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $293.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $272.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $339.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $475.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $553.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $510.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $421.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | $0 | ||
| Q4 25 | $10.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.9B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.4B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.5B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.6B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.6B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.3B | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $29.2B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $28.7B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $28.5B | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $29.0B | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $29.0B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $28.9B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $28.4B | $2.7B |
| Q1 26 | — | $4.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $213.5B | $4.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $211.3B | $4.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $211.6B | $3.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $210.3B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $208.1B | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $211.8B | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $208.9B | $3.6B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.37× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.45× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.43× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.36× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.43× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.40× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.40× | — |
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 | $3.0B | $265.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 3.96× | 0.66× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $265.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.0B | $281.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $49.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $844.0M | $182.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $635.0M | $161.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.6B | $282.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-28.0M | $166.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $216.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $218.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $131.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $97.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $225.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $114.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $171.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 20.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 20.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 14.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 29.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 15.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 23.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 5.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 6.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.66× | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.96× | 1.09× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.26× | 0.41× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.18× | 2.32× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.09× | 1.63× | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.30× | 1.93× | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.04× | 1.14× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.07× | 1.16× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
