vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Pentair (PNR) and Stanley Black & Decker (SWK), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Stanley Black & Decker is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.8B vs $1.0B, roughly 3.7× Pentair). Pentair runs the higher net margin — 16.3% vs 1.4%, a 14.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Pentair posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (4.9% vs 0.1%). Stanley Black & Decker produced more free cash flow last quarter ($155.3M vs $27.1M). Over the past eight quarters, Stanley Black & Decker's revenue compounded faster (0.3% CAGR vs 0.2%).
Pentair plc (PNR) is an American water treatment company incorporated in Ireland with tax residency in UK, with its main U.S. office in Golden Valley, Minnesota. Pentair was founded in the US, with 65% of company's revenue coming from the US and Canada as of 2017. PNR was reorganized in 2014, shifting the corporate domicile from Switzerland to Ireland.
Stanley Black & Decker, Inc., formerly known as The Stanley Works, is an American manufacturer of industrial tools and household hardware, and a provider of security products. Headquartered in the Greater Hartford city of New Britain, Connecticut, Stanley Black & Decker is the result of the merger of The Stanley Works and Black & Decker on March 12, 2010.
PNR vs SWK — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q3 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.0B | $3.8B |
| Net Profit | $166.1M | $51.4M |
| Gross Margin | 40.4% | 31.4% |
| Operating Margin | 20.1% | — |
| Net Margin | 16.3% | 1.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 4.9% | 0.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -0.2% | -43.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.01 | $0.34 |
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 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $972.9M | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $993.4M | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $4.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.0B | $3.9B |
| Q4 25 | $166.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $184.3M | $51.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $148.5M | $101.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $154.9M | $90.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $166.4M | $194.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $139.6M | $91.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $186.1M | $-11.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $133.3M | $19.5M |
| Q4 25 | 40.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 41.0% | 31.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 40.7% | 27.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 39.9% | 29.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 38.8% | 30.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 39.6% | 29.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.8% | 28.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 38.4% | 28.6% |
| Q4 25 | 20.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 22.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 20.1% | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.1% | 10.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.6% | 9.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 17.8% | 8.3% |
| Q4 25 | 16.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.0% | 1.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.2% | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 15.3% | 2.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.1% | 5.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.1% | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.9% | -0.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.1% | 0.5% |
| Q4 25 | $1.01 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.12 | $0.34 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.90 | $0.67 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.93 | $0.60 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.99 | $1.29 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.84 | $0.60 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.11 | $-0.07 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.80 | $0.13 |
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 | — | $268.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.6B | $5.3B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.9B | $9.0B |
| Total Assets | $6.9B | $21.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.42× | 0.59× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $128.4M | $268.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $143.0M | $311.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $140.6M | $344.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $118.7M | $290.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $218.1M | $298.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $214.3M | $318.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $109.1M | $476.6M |
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $5.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $5.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8B | $5.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $6.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $6.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8B | $6.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | $6.1B |
| Q4 25 | $3.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.8B | $9.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.7B | $9.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.6B | $8.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.6B | $8.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.5B | $8.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.4B | $8.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.3B | $8.9B |
| Q4 25 | $6.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.8B | $21.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.5B | $22.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.7B | $22.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.4B | $21.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.5B | $22.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.5B | $22.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.7B | $23.9B |
| Q4 25 | 0.42× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.42× | 0.59× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.38× | 0.62× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.51× | 0.63× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.46× | 0.70× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.69× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.51× | 0.70× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.63× | 0.69× |
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 | $50.8M | $221.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $27.1M | $155.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 2.7% | 4.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 2.3% | 1.8% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 0.31× | 4.30× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $746.0M | $369.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $50.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $196.3M | $221.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $606.6M | $214.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-38.9M | $-420.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $86.5M | $679.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $248.6M | $285.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $539.2M | $573.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-107.6M | $-431.0M |
| Q4 25 | $27.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $178.9M | $155.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $595.7M | $134.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-55.7M | $-485.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $63.8M | $564.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $233.2M | $199.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $522.2M | $485.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-126.9M | $-496.7M |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.5% | 4.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 53.0% | 3.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -5.5% | -13.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.6% | 15.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.5% | 5.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 47.5% | 12.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | -12.5% | -12.8% |
| Q4 25 | 2.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.7% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.0% | 2.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.7% | 1.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.3% | 3.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.6% | 2.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.5% | 2.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.9% | 1.7% |
| Q4 25 | 0.31× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.07× | 4.30× | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.08× | 2.10× | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.25× | -4.65× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.52× | 3.48× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.78× | 3.14× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.90× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.81× | -22.10× |
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
PNR
| Flow | $394.4M | 39% |
| Water Solutions | $232.3M | 23% |
| Industrial Sector | $206.0M | 20% |
| Developing Countries | $132.0M | 13% |
| Other Developed Countries | $62.2M | 6% |
SWK
| Tools And Outdoor Segment | $3.3B | 87% |
| Engineered Fastening Segment | $500.5M | 13% |
