vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Nine Energy Service, Inc. (NINE) and IMPINJ INC (PI). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Nine Energy Service, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($132.2M vs $74.3M, roughly 1.8× IMPINJ INC). IMPINJ INC runs the higher net margin — 11.2% vs -14.5%, a 25.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, IMPINJ INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-0.0% vs -6.5%). IMPINJ INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($2.2M vs $-4.8M). Over the past eight quarters, Nine Energy Service, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (-3.6% CAGR vs -14.9%).
Xcel Energy Inc. is a U.S. regulated electric utility and natural gas delivery company based in Minneapolis, Minnesota, serving approximately 3.9 million electricity customers and 2.2 million natural gas customers across parts of eight states as of mid-2025. It consists of four operating subsidiaries: Northern States Power-Minnesota, Northern States Power-Wisconsin, Public Service Company of Colorado, and Southwestern Public Service Co.
Impinj, Inc. is an American manufacturer of radio-frequency identification (RFID) devices and software. The company was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in Seattle, Washington. The company was started based on the research done at the California Institute of Technology by Carver Mead and Chris Diorio. Impinj currently produces EPC Class 1, Gen 2 passive UHF RFID chips, RFID readers, RFID reader chips, and RFID antennas, and software applications for encoding chips, and gathering business ...
NINE vs PI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $132.2M | $74.3M |
| Net Profit | $-19.2M | $8.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | 49.1% |
| Operating Margin | -4.2% | 30.5% |
| Net Margin | -14.5% | 11.2% |
| Revenue YoY | -6.5% | -0.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -117.4% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.47 | $0.14 |
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 | — | $74.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $132.2M | $92.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $132.0M | $96.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $147.3M | $97.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $150.5M | $74.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $141.4M | $91.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $138.2M | $95.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $132.4M | $102.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | $8.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-19.2M | $-1.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-14.6M | $-12.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-10.4M | $11.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.1M | $-8.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-8.8M | $-2.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.1M | $221.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $-14.0M | $10.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 49.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 51.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 50.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 57.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 49.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 50.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 50.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 56.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | 30.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | -4.2% | -2.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -0.9% | 0.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.3% | 11.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.7% | -12.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.5% | -3.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.8% | -0.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.1% | 8.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 11.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | -14.5% | -1.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -11.1% | -13.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -7.1% | 11.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.7% | -11.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | -6.3% | -2.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -7.3% | 0.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | -10.6% | 9.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.14 | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.47 | $-0.02 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.35 | $-0.44 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.25 | $0.39 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.18 | $-0.30 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.21 | $-0.06 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.26 | $0.01 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.40 | $0.34 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $18.4M | $131.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $241.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-115.0M | — |
| Total Assets | $339.5M | $502.5M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $131.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $18.4M | $175.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.4M | $190.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.2M | $193.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.3M | $147.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $27.9M | $164.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $15.7M | $170.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $26.0M | $220.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | $241.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $280.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $280.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $283.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-115.0M | $209.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-95.9M | $195.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-81.7M | $187.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-72.1M | $160.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-66.1M | $149.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-57.6M | $136.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-49.7M | $117.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $502.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | $339.5M | $545.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $340.7M | $516.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $361.2M | $508.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $359.2M | $479.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $360.1M | $489.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $353.2M | $476.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $381.7M | $446.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.34× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.44× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.89× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
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 | $-2.2M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-4.8M | $2.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -3.6% | 3.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-23.3M | $61.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-2.2M | $15.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-9.9M | $20.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.1M | $33.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $-11.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.0M | $12.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-5.8M | $10.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.9M | $45.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-4.8M | $13.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-13.4M | $18.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2M | $27.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-9.3M | $-13.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.8M | $8.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.3M | $4.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.3M | $44.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | 3.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | -3.6% | 14.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | -10.2% | 18.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.9% | 27.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.2% | -17.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.3% | 9.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -6.7% | 4.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.7% | 43.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.0% | 1.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.6% | 3.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.0% | 6.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.6% | 2.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.3% | 4.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.5% | 5.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.0% | 1.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.93× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 45.56× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.56× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
NINE
| Cement | $52.6M | 40% |
| Tool Revenue | $28.6M | 22% |
| Coiled Tubing | $25.8M | 20% |
| Wireline | $25.1M | 19% |
PI
Segment breakdown not available.
