vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of North American Construction Group Ltd. (NOA) and Teradyne (TER). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Teradyne is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.1B vs $860.2M, roughly 1.3× North American Construction Group Ltd.). Teradyne runs the higher net margin — 23.7% vs 4.7%, a 19.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. Over the past eight quarters, North American Construction Group Ltd.'s revenue compounded faster (58.0% CAGR vs 34.4%).
Shanghai Construction (Group) Corporation (SCG) is a Chinese construction and engineering company, ranked as the 16th largest construction company in the world based on 2011 revenues.
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.
NOA vs TER — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $860.2M | $1.1B |
| Net Profit | $40.5M | $257.2M |
| Gross Margin | 19.7% | 57.2% |
| Operating Margin | 15.4% | 27.1% |
| Net Margin | 4.7% | 23.7% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 43.9% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 75.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $1.62 |
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.
| Q4 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $860.2M | $769.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $573.3M | $651.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $297.0M | $685.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $752.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $636.4M | $737.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $439.5M | $729.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $244.3M | $599.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $257.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $40.5M | $119.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $26.0M | $78.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.5M | $98.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $146.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $45.5M | $145.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $34.1M | $186.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $21.8M | $64.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 57.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.7% | 58.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.1% | 57.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.0% | 60.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 59.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.0% | 59.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.3% | 58.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 16.8% | 56.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | 27.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.4% | 18.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.6% | 13.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.0% | 17.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 20.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.9% | 20.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.2% | 28.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.5% | 13.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | 23.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.7% | 15.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.5% | 12.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 14.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 19.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.1% | 19.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.8% | 25.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.9% | 10.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.62 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.75 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.49 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.61 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.89 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.89 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.14 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.40 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $293.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $2.8B |
| Total Assets | $1.7B | $4.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| 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 24 | — | $707.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.6B |
| Q4 25 | — | $4.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $4.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $3.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $3.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.5B | $3.4B |
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 | $140.7M | $281.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $218.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 20.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 5.8% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 3.47× | 1.09× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $450.4M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $281.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $140.7M | $49.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $85.4M | $182.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $19.0M | $161.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $282.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $109.5M | $166.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $72.0M | $216.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $31.8M | $7.3M |
| 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 24 | — | $-36.7M |
| 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 24 | — | -6.1% |
| 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 24 | — | 7.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.09× | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.47× | 0.41× | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.28× | 2.32× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.65× | 1.63× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.93× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.41× | 1.14× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.11× | 1.16× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.46× | 0.11× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
NOA
Segment breakdown not available.
TER
| Soc | $646.5M | 60% |
| Memory | $206.5M | 19% |
| Transferred At Point In Time | $90.0M | 8% |
| Universal Robots | $89.4M | 8% |
| IST | $30.5M | 3% |
| Transferred Over Time | $20.5M | 2% |
