vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Seneca Foods Corp (SENEB) and SPX Technologies, Inc. (SPXC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
SPX Technologies, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($637.3M vs $508.3M, roughly 1.3× Seneca Foods Corp). SPX Technologies, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 12.2% vs 8.8%, a 3.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, SPX Technologies, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (19.4% vs 1.1%). SPX Technologies, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($126.7M vs $22.9M). Over the past eight quarters, Seneca Foods Corp's revenue compounded faster (77.1% CAGR vs 17.0%).
Seneca Foods Corporation is an American food processor and distributor headquartered in Fairport, New York, United States. Seneca Foods Corporation conducts its business almost entirely in food packaging, which contributed to about 98% of the company's fiscal year net sales in 2017. Canned vegetables represented 65%, fruit products represented 23%, frozen fruit and vegetables represented 11% and fruit chip products represented 1% of the total food packaging net sales. Non-food packaging sales...
SPX Technologies, Inc. is an American manufacturing company, headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. The company operates within four markets: heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), detection and measurement, power transmission and generation, and engineered solutions. Examples of SPX’s products include cooling towers and boilers, underground pipe and cable locators, power transformers, and heat exchangers. Brands include Waukesha, Dielectric, Genfare, Fahrenheat, Radiodetecti...
SENEB vs SPXC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $508.3M | $637.3M |
| Net Profit | $44.8M | $77.9M |
| Gross Margin | 16.4% | 39.8% |
| Operating Margin | 11.8% | 15.7% |
| Net Margin | 8.8% | 12.2% |
| Revenue YoY | 1.1% | 19.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 205.4% | 36.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $6.48 | $1.56 |
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 | $508.3M | $637.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $460.0M | $592.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $297.5M | $552.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $345.8M | $482.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $502.9M | $533.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $425.5M | $483.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $304.7M | $501.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $162.2M | $465.2M |
| Q4 25 | $44.8M | $77.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $29.7M | $62.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.9M | $52.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $601.0K | $51.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.7M | $57.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.3M | $50.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.7M | $44.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $49.0M |
| Q4 25 | 16.4% | 39.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.4% | 40.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.1% | 41.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.5% | 40.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.8% | 40.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.1% | 40.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.0% | 40.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 39.3% |
| Q4 25 | 11.8% | 15.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.0% | 16.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.8% | 15.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.6% | 13.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.1% | 16.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.8% | 16.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.3% | 14.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.5% | 13.9% |
| Q4 25 | 8.8% | 12.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.5% | 10.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.0% | 9.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.2% | 10.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.9% | 10.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.1% | 10.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.2% | 8.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 10.5% |
| Q4 25 | $6.48 | $1.56 | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.29 | $1.28 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.14 | $1.10 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.10 | $1.09 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.10 | $1.21 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.90 | $1.06 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.80 | $0.94 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.05 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $33.3M | $364.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $275.8M | $496.7M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $713.9M | $2.2B |
| Total Assets | $1.2B | $3.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.39× | 0.22× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $33.3M | $364.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.1M | $229.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.1M | $132.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $42.7M | $177.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.3M | $156.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.5M | $124.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.5M | $128.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $100.5M |
| Q4 25 | $275.8M | $496.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $280.2M | $499.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $293.9M | $950.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $369.9M | $872.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $416.2M | $577.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $504.6M | $665.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $572.1M | $509.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $604.8M | $516.6M |
| Q4 25 | $713.9M | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $672.9M | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $644.2M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $633.0M | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $612.8M | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $598.9M | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $588.9M | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $582.9M | $1.2B |
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $3.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | $2.8B |
| Q4 25 | 0.39× | 0.22× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.42× | 0.23× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.46× | 0.62× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.58× | 0.60× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.68× | 0.42× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.84× | 0.49× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.97× | 0.40× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.04× | 0.42× |
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 | $31.1M | $195.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $22.9M | $126.7M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 4.5% | 19.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.6% | 10.7% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.70× | 2.51× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $168.5M | $241.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $31.1M | $195.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $29.3M | $106.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $53.7M | $42.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $91.9M | $-10.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $117.7M | $166.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $75.5M | $51.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $50.3M | $57.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $10.5M |
| Q4 25 | $22.9M | $126.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $21.8M | $96.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $42.4M | $34.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $81.4M | $-16.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $108.7M | $156.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $70.0M | $43.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $38.3M | $47.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $600.0K |
| Q4 25 | 4.5% | 19.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.7% | 16.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.3% | 6.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 23.5% | -3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.6% | 29.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.4% | 9.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.6% | 9.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.1% |
| Q4 25 | 1.6% | 10.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.6% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.8% | 1.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.0% | 1.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.8% | 1.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.3% | 1.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.1% |
| Q4 25 | 0.70× | 2.51× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.99× | 1.70× | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.61× | 0.81× | ||
| Q1 25 | 152.87× | -0.21× | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.03× | 2.92× | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.68× | 1.02× | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.98× | 1.30× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.21× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
SENEB
| Canned Vegetables | $430.2M | 85% |
| Fruit | $34.6M | 7% |
| Frozen | $29.3M | 6% |
| Manufactured Product Other | $10.8M | 2% |
| Snack | $3.4M | 1% |
SPXC
| Package And Process Cooling Equipment And Services And Engineered Air Movement And Handling Solutions | $258.5M | 41% |
| Detectionand Measurement Reportable Segment | $206.2M | 32% |
| CA | $57.7M | 9% |
| Kranze Technology Solutions Inc | $37.9M | 6% |
| GB | $32.0M | 5% |
| Other Foreign Countries | $28.6M | 4% |
| Other | $16.4M | 3% |
