vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Nine Energy Service, Inc. (NINE) and Thryv Holdings, Inc. (THRY). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Thryv Holdings, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($167.7M vs $132.2M, roughly 1.3× Nine Energy Service, Inc.). Thryv Holdings, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 2.7% vs -14.5%, a 17.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Nine Energy Service, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-6.5% vs -7.5%). Nine Energy Service, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-4.8M vs $-5.5M). Over the past eight quarters, Nine Energy Service, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (-3.6% CAGR vs -13.5%).
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.
Thryv Holdings, Inc. is a publicly traded software as a service (SaaS) company, providing customer relationship management and online reputation management software for small businesses. It has headquarters in Dallas, Texas, and operates in 48 states across the United States of America with more than 2,400 employees. The company began as a conglomerate of Yellow Pages companies. In June 2020, Thryv reported $1.3 billion in revenue over a twelve-month period.
NINE vs THRY — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $132.2M | $167.7M |
| Net Profit | $-19.2M | $4.5M |
| Gross Margin | — | 65.2% |
| Operating Margin | -4.2% | 37.3% |
| Net Margin | -14.5% | 2.7% |
| Revenue YoY | -6.5% | -7.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | -117.4% | 147.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.47 | $0.10 |
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 | — | $167.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | $132.2M | $191.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $132.0M | $201.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $147.3M | $210.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $150.5M | $181.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $141.4M | $186.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $138.2M | $179.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $132.4M | $224.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | $4.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-19.2M | $-9.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-14.6M | $5.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-10.4M | $13.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.1M | $-9.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-8.8M | $7.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.1M | $-96.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-14.0M | $5.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | 65.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 68.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 67.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 69.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 65.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 65.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 62.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 66.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | 37.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | -4.2% | 5.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -0.9% | 9.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.3% | 14.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.7% | -1.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.5% | -3.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.8% | -49.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.1% | 14.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | 2.7% | ||
| Q4 25 | -14.5% | -5.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -11.1% | 2.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -7.1% | 6.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.7% | -5.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -6.3% | 4.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -7.3% | -53.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | -10.6% | 2.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.10 | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.47 | $-0.21 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.35 | $0.13 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.25 | $0.31 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.18 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.21 | $0.28 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.26 | $-2.65 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.40 | $0.15 |
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 | $8.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-115.0M | $225.4M |
| Total Assets | $339.5M | $693.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $8.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $18.4M | $10.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.4M | $11.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.2M | $10.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.3M | $11.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $27.9M | $16.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $15.7M | $12.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $26.0M | $15.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $253.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $268.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $275.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $299.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $284.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $307.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $342.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | $225.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-115.0M | $218.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-95.9M | $221.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-81.7M | $214.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-72.1M | $193.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-66.1M | $196.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-57.6M | $94.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-49.7M | $183.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | $693.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | $339.5M | $688.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $340.7M | $701.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $361.2M | $687.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $359.2M | $703.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $360.1M | $712.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $353.2M | $654.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $381.7M | $785.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.16× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.21× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.28× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.55× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.44× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.26× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.87× |
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 | $-5.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -3.6% | -3.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-23.3M | $43.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-2.2M | $22.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-9.9M | $22.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.1M | $29.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.3M | $-10.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.0M | $26.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-5.8M | $36.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.9M | $22.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | $-5.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-4.8M | $12.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-13.4M | $14.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2M | $21.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-9.3M | $-17.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.8M | $17.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.3M | $27.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.3M | $13.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | -3.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | -3.6% | 6.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | -10.2% | 7.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.9% | 10.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.2% | -9.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.3% | 9.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -6.7% | 15.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.7% | 5.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.0% | 5.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.6% | 3.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.0% | 3.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.6% | 3.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.3% | 4.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.5% | 4.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.0% | 4.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.93× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.12× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.32× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.01× |
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% |
THRY
| SaaS | $116.7M | 70% |
| Other | $50.9M | 30% |
