vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL INC (OII) and Rocket Lab Corp (RKLB), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($668.6M vs $179.7M, roughly 3.7× Rocket Lab Corp). OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL INC runs the higher net margin — 26.6% vs -29.5%, a 56.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Rocket Lab Corp posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (35.7% vs -6.3%). OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($190.7M vs $-114.2M). Over the past eight quarters, Rocket Lab Corp's revenue compounded faster (39.2% CAGR vs 5.6%).
Oceaneering International, Inc. is a subsea engineering and applied technology company based in Houston, Texas, U.S. that provides engineered services and hardware to customers who operate in marine, space, and other environments.
Rocket Lab Corporation is a publicly traded aerospace manufacturer and launch service provider. Its Electron orbital rocket launches small satellites and has successfully completed over 75 missions as of January 2026, making it the most prolific small-lift launch vehicle in operation globally. A suborbital variant of Electron, called HASTE, was developed as a testbed to advance hypersonic technology development, while the next-generation reusable Neutron medium-lift launch vehicle is in devel...
OII vs RKLB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $668.6M | $179.7M |
| Net Profit | $177.7M | $-52.9M |
| Gross Margin | 19.8% | 38.0% |
| Operating Margin | 9.8% | -28.4% |
| Net Margin | 26.6% | -29.5% |
| Revenue YoY | -6.3% | 35.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 216.7% | -1.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.75 | $-0.09 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $668.6M | $179.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $742.9M | $155.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $698.2M | $144.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $674.5M | $122.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $713.5M | $132.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $679.8M | $104.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $668.8M | $106.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $599.1M | $92.8M |
| Q4 25 | $177.7M | $-52.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $71.3M | $-18.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $54.4M | $-66.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $50.4M | $-60.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $56.1M | $-52.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $41.2M | $-51.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $35.0M | $-41.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $15.1M | $-44.3M |
| Q4 25 | 19.8% | 38.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.6% | 37.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 21.3% | 32.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.0% | 28.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.9% | 27.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.3% | 26.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.0% | 25.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.4% | 26.1% |
| Q4 25 | 9.8% | -28.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.6% | -38.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.3% | -41.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.9% | -48.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.9% | -38.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.5% | -49.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.0% | -40.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 6.1% | -46.4% |
| Q4 25 | 26.6% | -29.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.6% | -11.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.8% | -46.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.5% | -49.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.9% | -39.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.1% | -49.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.2% | -39.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.5% | -47.7% |
| Q4 25 | $1.75 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.71 | $-0.03 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.54 | $-0.13 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.49 | $-0.12 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.55 | $-0.11 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.40 | $-0.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.34 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.15 | $-0.09 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $695.9M | $1.0B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $487.4M | $152.4M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.1B | $1.7B |
| Total Assets | $2.7B | $2.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.46× | 0.09× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $695.9M | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.0M | $976.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.0M | $688.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.0M | $428.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $504.5M | $419.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $442.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $496.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $492.5M |
| Q4 25 | $487.4M | $152.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $347.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $346.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $345.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $482.0M | $345.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $61.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $64.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $66.8M |
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $907.7M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $842.1M | $688.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $773.1M | $431.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $714.3M | $382.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $698.0M | $419.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $651.0M | $455.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $623.1M | $478.9M |
| Q4 25 | $2.7B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5B | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.3B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.3B | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.2B | $1.2B |
| Q4 25 | 0.46× | 0.09× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.27× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.50× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.80× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.67× | 0.90× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.15× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.14× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.14× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $221.1M | $-64.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $190.7M | $-114.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 28.5% | -63.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 4.6% | 27.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.24× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $207.8M | $-321.8M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $221.1M | $-64.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $101.3M | $-23.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $77.2M | $-23.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-80.7M | $-54.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $128.4M | $-2.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $91.9M | $-30.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $52.6M | $-13.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-69.7M | $-2.6M |
| Q4 25 | $190.7M | $-114.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $77.0M | $-69.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $46.9M | $-55.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-106.8M | $-82.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $94.5M | $-23.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $67.0M | $-41.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $29.8M | $-28.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-95.2M | $-21.8M |
| Q4 25 | 28.5% | -63.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.4% | -44.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.7% | -38.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -15.8% | -67.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.2% | -18.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.9% | -40.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.5% | -26.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | -15.9% | -23.5% |
| Q4 25 | 4.6% | 27.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.3% | 29.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.3% | 22.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 23.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.7% | 16.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.7% | 10.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.4% | 14.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.3% | 20.7% |
| Q4 25 | 1.24× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.42× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.42× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.60× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.29× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.23× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.50× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -4.61× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
OII
| Other | $381.4M | 57% |
| Offshore Projects Group | $130.8M | 20% |
| GB | $64.7M | 10% |
| Transferred At Point In Time | $52.2M | 8% |
| NO | $39.6M | 6% |
RKLB
| Products | $94.0M | 52% |
| Transferred Over Time | $87.3M | 49% |
