vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Match Group (MTCH) and ON Semiconductor (ON). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ON Semiconductor is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.5B vs $864.0M, roughly 1.8× Match Group). Match Group runs the higher net margin — 19.3% vs 12.0%, a 7.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, ON Semiconductor posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.7% vs 4.0%). ON Semiconductor produced more free cash flow last quarter ($217.2M vs $174.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Match Group's revenue compounded faster (-0.0% CAGR vs -9.9%).
Match Group, Inc. is an American internet and technology company headquartered in Dallas, Texas. It owns and operates the largest global portfolio of popular online dating services including Tinder, Match.com, Meetic, OkCupid, Hinge, Plenty of Fish, Azar, and other dating global brands. The company was owned by IAC until July 2020 when Match Group was spun off as a separate, public company. As of 2019, the company had 9.3 million subscribers, of which 4.6 million were in North America. Japan ...
Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. was an American semiconductor company based in San Jose, California. It was founded in 1957 as a division of Fairchild Camera and Instrument by the "traitorous eight" who defected from Shockley Semiconductor Laboratory. It became a pioneer in the manufacturing of transistors and of integrated circuits. Schlumberger bought the firm in 1979 and sold it to National Semiconductor in 1987; Fairchild was spun off as an independent company again in 1997. I...
MTCH vs ON — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $864.0M | $1.5B |
| Net Profit | $167.0M | $181.8M |
| Gross Margin | 75.6% | 38.5% |
| Operating Margin | 27.4% | 57.9% |
| Net Margin | 19.3% | 12.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 4.0% | 4.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 41.5% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.45 |
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 | $864.0M | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | $878.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $914.3M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $863.7M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $831.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $860.2M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $895.5M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $864.1M | $1.7B |
| Q1 26 | $167.0M | $181.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $209.7M | $255.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $160.8M | $170.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $125.5M | $-486.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $117.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $158.3M | $379.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $136.5M | $401.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $133.3M | $338.2M |
| Q1 26 | 75.6% | 38.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 74.7% | 37.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 73.0% | 37.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 72.0% | 20.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 71.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 72.5% | 45.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 71.7% | 45.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 71.6% | 45.2% |
| Q1 26 | 27.4% | 57.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | 32.4% | 17.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.2% | 13.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.5% | -39.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 26.0% | 23.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.5% | 25.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.7% | 22.4% |
| Q1 26 | 19.3% | 12.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 23.9% | 16.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.6% | 11.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.5% | -33.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 14.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 18.4% | 22.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.2% | 22.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.4% | 19.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.45 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.83 | $0.63 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.62 | $0.41 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.49 | $-1.15 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.44 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.59 | $0.88 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.51 | $0.93 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.48 | $0.78 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.0B | $2.4B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.6B | $3.0B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-218.1M | $7.3B |
| Total Assets | $4.4B | $12.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.41× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $1.0B | $2.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $340.4M | $3.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $414.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $970.7M | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $860.9M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $843.6M | $2.7B |
| Q1 26 | $3.6B | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | $3.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.8B | $3.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.8B | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.8B | $3.4B |
| Q1 26 | $-218.1M | $7.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $-253.5M | $7.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $-223.9M | $7.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $-230.9M | $8.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $-182.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-63.7M | $8.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $-88.5M | $8.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $-130.2M | $8.3B |
| Q1 26 | $4.4B | $12.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.5B | $13.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.5B | $13.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.9B | $13.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.5B | $14.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.4B | $13.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.4B | $13.7B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.41× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.43× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.43× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.42× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.38× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.39× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.41× |
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 | $194.4M | $239.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $174.0M | $217.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 20.1% | 14.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.4% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.16× | 1.32× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.0B | $1.2B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $194.4M | $239.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $322.8M | $418.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $320.6M | $184.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $243.8M | $602.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $193.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $254.7M | $579.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $264.9M | $465.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $129.0M | $362.2M |
| Q1 26 | $174.0M | $217.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $308.1M | $372.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $306.8M | $106.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $231.0M | $454.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $177.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $247.1M | $434.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $251.8M | $293.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $116.3M | $207.7M |
| Q1 26 | 20.1% | 14.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | 35.1% | 24.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 33.6% | 7.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.7% | 31.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 28.7% | 25.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 28.1% | 16.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.5% | 12.0% |
| Q1 26 | 2.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.7% | 3.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.5% | 5.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.5% | 10.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.9% | 8.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.5% | 9.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.5% | 8.9% |
| Q1 26 | 1.16× | 1.32× | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.54× | 1.64× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.99× | 1.08× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.94× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.64× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.61× | 1.53× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.94× | 1.16× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.97× | 1.07× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
