vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc. (MTSI) and Phillips Edison & Company, Inc. (PECO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($271.6M vs $190.7M, roughly 1.4× Phillips Edison & Company, Inc.). MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 18.0% vs 17.4%, a 0.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (24.5% vs 7.0%). Over the past eight quarters, MACOM Technology Solutions Holdings, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (22.4% CAGR vs 8.7%).
MACOM Technology Solutions, Inc. is an American developer and producer of radio, microwave, and millimeter wave semiconductor devices and components. The company is headquartered in Lowell, Massachusetts, and in 2005 was Lowell's largest private employer. MACOM is certified to the ISO 9001 international quality standard and ISO 14001 environmental standard. The company has design centers and sales offices in North America, Europe, Asia and Australia.
Consolidated Edison, Inc., commonly known as Con Edison or ConEd, is an energy company based in New York City. It is one of the largest investor-owned energy companies in the United States, with approximately $15.26 billion in annual revenues as of 2024, and over $70 billion in assets. The company provides a wide range of energy-related products and services to its customers through its subsidiaries:Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (CECONY), a regulated utility providing electric...
MTSI vs PECO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $271.6M | $190.7M |
| Net Profit | $48.8M | $33.2M |
| Gross Margin | 55.9% | — |
| Operating Margin | 15.9% | 30.5% |
| Net Margin | 18.0% | 17.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 24.5% | 7.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 129.1% | 15.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.64 | $0.24 |
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 | $271.6M | $190.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | $261.2M | $187.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $252.1M | $182.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $235.9M | $177.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $218.1M | $178.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $173.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $200.7M | $165.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $190.5M | $161.5M |
| Q1 26 | $48.8M | $33.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $45.1M | $47.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $36.5M | $24.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $31.7M | $12.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-167.5M | $26.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $18.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $29.4M | $11.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.9M | $15.3M |
| Q1 26 | 55.9% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 54.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 55.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 55.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 53.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 54.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 53.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | 15.9% | 30.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 15.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.4% | — |
| Q1 26 | 18.0% | 17.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.3% | 25.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.5% | 13.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.4% | 7.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -76.8% | 14.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 10.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.7% | 7.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.5% | 9.5% |
| Q1 26 | $0.64 | $0.24 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.67 | $0.38 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.48 | $0.20 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.42 | $0.10 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.30 | $0.21 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.16 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.40 | $0.09 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.27 | $0.12 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $768.5M | $3.1M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.4B | $2.3B |
| Total Assets | $2.1B | $5.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $768.5M | $3.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $786.0M | $3.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $735.2M | $4.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $681.5M | $5.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $656.5M | $5.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $581.9M | $6.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $521.5M | $7.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.0B |
| Q1 26 | $1.4B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $2.3B |
| Q1 26 | $2.1B | $5.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.1B | $5.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $5.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $5.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8B | $5.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $5.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | $5.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | $4.9B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.04× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.05× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.04× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.99× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.91× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.94× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.90× |
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 | $42.9M | $55.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $30.0M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 11.0% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 4.8% | 12.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.88× | 1.67× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $161.5M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $42.9M | $55.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $69.6M | $348.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $60.4M | $95.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.7M | $96.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $66.7M | $60.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $334.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $62.3M | $109.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $49.0M | $78.5M |
| Q1 26 | $30.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $49.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $51.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $30.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $61.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $57.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $41.5M | — |
| Q1 26 | 11.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 18.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 28.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 28.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.8% | — |
| Q1 26 | 4.8% | 12.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.88× | 1.67× | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.54× | 7.33× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.65× | 3.87× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.22× | 7.52× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.30× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 18.45× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.12× | 9.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.46× | 5.14× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
MTSI
| Industrial Defense | $117.7M | 43% |
| Data Center | $85.8M | 32% |
| Telecom | $68.1M | 25% |
PECO
| Rental income | $186.3M | 98% |
| Fees and management income | $3.4M | 2% |
