vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ON Semiconductor (ON) and Xylem Inc. (XYL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Xylem Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.1B vs $1.6B, roughly 1.4× ON Semiconductor). ON Semiconductor runs the higher net margin — 16.4% vs 8.9%, a 7.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Xylem Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (2.7% vs -10.0%). Over the past eight quarters, Xylem Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (-1.0% CAGR vs -12.3%).
Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. was an American semiconductor company based in San Jose, California. It was founded in 1957 as a division of Fairchild Camera and Instrument by the "traitorous eight" who defected from Shockley Semiconductor Laboratory. It became a pioneer in the manufacturing of transistors and of integrated circuits. Schlumberger bought the firm in 1979 and sold it to National Semiconductor in 1987; Fairchild was spun off as an independent company again in 1997. I...
Xylem is one of the two types of transport tissue in vascular plants, the other being phloem; both of these are part of the vascular bundle. The basic function of the xylem is to transport water upward from the roots to parts of the plants such as stems and leaves, but it also transports nutrients. The word xylem is derived from the Ancient Greek word ξύλον (xúlon), meaning "wood"; the best-known xylem tissue is wood, though it is found throughout a plant.
ON vs XYL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.6B | $2.1B |
| Net Profit | $255.0M | $189.0M |
| Gross Margin | 37.9% | 37.8% |
| Operating Margin | 17.0% | 11.5% |
| Net Margin | 16.4% | 8.9% |
| Revenue YoY | -10.0% | 2.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | -32.9% | 100.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.63 | $0.79 |
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 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $2.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.7B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | $2.2B |
| Q1 26 | — | $189.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $255.0M | $335.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $170.3M | $227.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-486.1M | $226.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $169.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $379.9M | $326.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $401.7M | $217.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $338.2M | $194.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 37.8% | ||
| Q4 25 | 37.9% | 38.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 37.6% | 38.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.3% | 38.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 37.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 45.2% | 38.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 45.4% | 37.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 45.2% | 37.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 11.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.0% | 14.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.2% | 14.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -39.7% | 13.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 11.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 23.7% | 11.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 25.3% | 13.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.4% | 11.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | 8.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | 16.4% | 14.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.6% | 10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -33.6% | 9.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 8.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.1% | 14.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.8% | 10.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.5% | 8.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.79 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.63 | $1.37 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.41 | $0.93 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.15 | $0.93 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.69 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.88 | $1.33 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.93 | $0.89 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.78 | $0.80 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.9B | $808.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.4B | $1.9B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $7.9B | $11.0B |
| Total Assets | $13.0B | $17.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.43× | 0.18× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $808.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.9B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.8B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.0B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8B | $989.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.7B | $815.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.4B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.4B | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.4B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.4B | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $11.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.9B | $11.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.9B | $11.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.0B | $11.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $10.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.8B | $10.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.6B | $10.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.3B | $10.3B |
| Q1 26 | — | $17.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | $13.0B | $17.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.1B | $17.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.3B | $17.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $16.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.1B | $16.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.9B | $16.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.7B | $15.8B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.18× | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.43× | 0.17× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.43× | 0.18× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.42× | 0.18× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.19× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.38× | 0.19× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.39× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.41× | — |
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 | $418.7M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $372.4M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 24.0% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.0% | 4.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.64× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.4B | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $418.7M | $543.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $184.3M | $360.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $602.3M | $305.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $33.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $579.7M | $575.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $465.8M | $311.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $362.2M | $288.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $372.4M | $460.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $106.1M | $281.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $454.7M | $207.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-38.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $434.8M | $475.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $293.6M | $237.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $207.7M | $215.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 24.0% | 19.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.2% | 12.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 31.5% | 9.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -1.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.2% | 21.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.7% | 11.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.0% | 9.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | 4.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.0% | 3.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.3% | 3.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.2% | 4.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.4% | 4.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.8% | 3.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.9% | 3.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.64× | 1.62× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.08× | 1.59× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.35× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.20× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.53× | 1.76× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.16× | 1.43× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.07× | 1.48× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ON
| Industrial Segment | $426.3M | 27% |
| Other End Markets Segment | $337.3M | 22% |
| Intelligent Sensing Segments | $284.0M | 18% |
| Direct Customers | $282.4M | 18% |
| Intelligent Sensing Group | $230.0M | 15% |
XYL
| Revenue from products | $1.8B | 83% |
| Revenue from services | $368.0M | 17% |
