vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of OLD NATIONAL BANCORP (ONB) and Tempus AI, Inc. (TEM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
OLD NATIONAL BANCORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($702.8M vs $367.2M, roughly 1.9× Tempus AI, Inc.). OLD NATIONAL BANCORP runs the higher net margin — 33.3% vs -14.8%, a 48.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Tempus AI, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (83.0% vs 44.4%). Over the past eight quarters, Tempus AI, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (58.7% CAGR vs 34.5%).
Old National Bank is an American regional bank with nearly 200 retail branches operated by Old National Bancorp and based in Chicago and Evansville, Indiana. With assets at $48.5 billion and 250 banking centers, Old National Bancorp is the largest financial services bank holding company headquartered in Indiana and one of the top 30 banking companies in the U.S. Old National Bank has locations in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.
Tempus AI, Inc. is an American health technology company founded in 2015 by Eric Lefkofsky in Chicago, Illinois. It was established by Lefkofsky soon after his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. Tempus uses data and artificial intelligence (AI) to create precision medicine services, including diagnostics, for oncology, cardiology, radiology, and depression. The company went public on the Nasdaq on June 14, 2024, under the ticker symbol "TEM."
ONB vs TEM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $702.8M | $367.2M |
| Net Profit | $233.7M | $-54.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -16.7% |
| Net Margin | 33.3% | -14.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 44.4% | 83.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 61.5% | -316.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-0.30 |
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 | $702.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $580.8M | $367.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $574.6M | $334.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $514.8M | $314.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $387.6M | $255.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $394.2M | $200.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $391.7M | $180.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $388.4M | $166.0M |
| Q1 26 | $233.7M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $216.6M | $-54.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $182.6M | $-80.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $125.4M | $-42.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $144.7M | $-68.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $153.9M | $-13.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $143.8M | $-75.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $121.2M | $-552.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 46.7% | -16.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 40.5% | -18.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 30.2% | -19.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 46.8% | -26.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 47.2% | -25.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 47.2% | -29.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 40.3% | -321.4% |
| Q1 26 | 33.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 37.3% | -14.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 31.8% | -23.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.4% | -13.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 37.3% | -26.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 39.0% | -6.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 36.7% | -41.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 31.2% | -332.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.55 | $-0.30 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.46 | $-0.46 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.34 | $-0.25 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.44 | $-0.40 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.47 | $2.56 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.44 | $-0.46 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.37 | $-6.86 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $604.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $8.5B | $491.3M |
| Total Assets | $73.0B | $2.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.8B | $604.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $655.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $186.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $151.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $341.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $388.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | $478.8M |
| Q1 26 | $8.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $8.5B | $491.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.3B | $507.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.1B | $309.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.5B | $326.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.3B | $56.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.4B | $53.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.1B | $98.3M |
| Q1 26 | $73.0B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $72.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $71.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $71.0B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $53.9B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $53.6B | $926.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $53.6B | $971.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $53.1B | $864.6M |
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 | — | $-36.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-41.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -11.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-239.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $159.2M | $-36.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $341.2M | $-119.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $72.9M | $44.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $108.2M | $-105.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $235.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $121.3M | $48.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $161.0M | $-97.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $137.3M | $-41.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $333.6M | $-126.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $64.1M | $36.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $102.4M | $-107.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $229.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $115.7M | $48.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $151.6M | $-105.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 23.6% | -11.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 58.1% | -37.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.4% | 11.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 26.4% | -42.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 58.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 29.5% | 26.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.0% | -63.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.8% | 1.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.3% | 2.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.7% | 2.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.5% | 0.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.4% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.4% | 4.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.73× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.87× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.58× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.75× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.53× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.84× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.33× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
