vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Pure Storage, Inc. (PSTG) and Texas Roadhouse, Inc. (TXRH). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Texas Roadhouse, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.5B vs $964.5M, roughly 1.5× Pure Storage, Inc.). Texas Roadhouse, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 5.8% vs 5.7%, a 0.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Pure Storage, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (16.0% vs 3.1%). Over the past eight quarters, Texas Roadhouse, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (12.8% CAGR vs 10.5%).
Pure Storage, Inc. is an American publicly traded technology company headquartered in Santa Clara, California, United States. It develops all-flash data storage hardware and software products. Pure Storage was founded in 2009 and developed its products in stealth mode until 2011. Afterwards, the company grew in revenues by about 50% per quarter and raised more than $470 million in venture capital funding, before going public in 2015. Initially, Pure Storage developed the software for storage ...
Texas Roadhouse is an American steakhouse chain that specializes in steaks in a Texan and Southwestern cuisine style. It is a subsidiary of Texas Roadhouse Inc, which has two other concepts and is headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. As of August 2025, the chain operates about 800 locations in 49 U.S. states and 70 international locations in 11 countries.
PSTG vs TXRH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $964.5M | $1.5B |
| Net Profit | $54.8M | $86.7M |
| Gross Margin | 72.3% | — |
| Operating Margin | 5.6% | 6.5% |
| Net Margin | 5.7% | 5.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 16.0% | 3.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -13.9% | -26.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.16 | $1.29 |
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 | $964.5M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $861.0M | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $778.5M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $879.8M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $831.1M | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $763.8M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $693.5M | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $789.8M | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | $54.8M | $86.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $47.1M | $84.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-14.0M | $116.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $42.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $63.6M | $118.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $35.7M | $86.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-35.0M | $123.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $65.4M | $116.0M |
| Q4 25 | 72.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 70.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 68.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 67.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 70.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 70.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 71.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 72.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | 5.6% | 6.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.6% | 6.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -4.0% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.2% | 9.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.3% | 8.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -6.0% | 10.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.3% | 10.1% |
| Q4 25 | 5.7% | 5.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.5% | 5.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -1.8% | 8.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.7% | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.7% | 6.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -5.0% | 9.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.3% | 8.8% |
| Q4 25 | $0.16 | $1.29 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.14 | $1.25 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.04 | $1.70 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.13 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.19 | $1.73 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.10 | $1.26 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.11 | $1.79 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.22 | $1.69 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $852.8M | $134.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.4B | $1.5B |
| Total Assets | $4.2B | $3.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $852.8M | $134.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $887.8M | $108.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $739.3M | $221.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $723.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $894.6M | $245.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $965.0M | $189.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $900.6M | $197.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $702.5M | $213.4M |
| Q4 25 | $1.4B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.3B | $1.2B |
| Q4 25 | $4.2B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.0B | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.8B | $3.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.9B | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.8B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.6B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.7B | $2.8B |
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 | $116.0M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $52.6M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 5.5% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 6.6% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.12× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $566.7M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $116.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $212.2M | $143.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $283.9M | $237.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $208.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $97.0M | $237.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $226.6M | $138.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $221.5M | $133.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $244.4M | $243.4M |
| Q4 25 | $52.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $150.1M | $14.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $211.6M | $160.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $152.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $35.2M | $129.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $166.6M | $47.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $172.7M | $56.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $200.9M | $165.8M |
| Q4 25 | 5.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.4% | 1.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 27.2% | 11.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 17.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.2% | 9.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 21.8% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 24.9% | 4.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 25.4% | 12.5% |
| Q4 25 | 6.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.2% | 9.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | 5.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.4% | 7.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.9% | 7.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.0% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.5% | 5.9% |
| Q4 25 | 2.12× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.50× | 1.69× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.05× | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.91× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.52× | 2.00× | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.35× | 1.60× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.09× | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.74× | 2.10× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
PSTG
| US | $683.2M | 71% |
| Non Us | $281.3M | 29% |
TXRH
| Food And Beverage | $1.5B | 99% |
| Texas Roadhouse Segment | $21.2M | 1% |
| Franchise | $8.2M | 1% |
| Franchise Royalty | $7.4M | 0% |
| Bubba S33Segment | $2.3M | 0% |
