vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Sempra (SRE) and Seagate Technology (STX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Sempra is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.3B vs $3.1B, roughly 1.1× Seagate Technology). Seagate Technology runs the higher net margin — 24.0% vs 10.7%, a 13.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Seagate Technology posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (44.1% vs 6.9%). Seagate Technology produced more free cash flow last quarter ($953.0M vs $-2.2B). Over the past eight quarters, Seagate Technology's revenue compounded faster (28.4% CAGR vs -5.8%).
Sempra is a North American public utility holding company based in San Diego, California. The company is one of the largest utility holding companies in the United States with nearly 40 million consumers.
Seagate Technology Holdings plc is an American data storage company. It was incorporated in 1978 as Shugart Technology and commenced business in 1979. Since 2010, the company has been incorporated in Dublin, Ireland, with operational headquarters in Fremont, California, United States.
SRE vs STX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.3B | $3.1B |
| Net Profit | $352.0M | $748.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | 46.5% |
| Operating Margin | 7.2% | 32.1% |
| Net Margin | 10.7% | 24.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 6.9% | 44.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -47.9% | -23.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.53 | $3.27 |
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.
| Q3 26 | — | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 26 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.3B | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.8B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.7B | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7B | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1B | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.6B | $2.2B |
| Q3 26 | — | $748.0M | ||
| Q1 26 | — | $593.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $352.0M | $549.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $95.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $473.0M | $488.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $917.0M | $340.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $676.0M | $336.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $649.0M | $305.0M |
| Q3 26 | — | 46.5% | ||
| Q1 26 | — | 41.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 39.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 37.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 35.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 34.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 32.9% |
| Q3 26 | — | 32.1% | ||
| Q1 26 | — | 29.8% | ||
| Q4 25 | 7.2% | 26.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.3% | 23.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.5% | 20.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 35.0% | 21.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.9% | 18.6% |
| Q3 26 | — | 24.0% | ||
| Q1 26 | — | 21.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 10.7% | 20.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.5% | 20.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.9% | 15.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.0% | 14.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 25.3% | 14.1% |
| Q3 26 | — | $3.27 | ||
| Q1 26 | — | $2.60 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.53 | $2.43 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.12 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.71 | $2.24 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.39 | $1.57 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.04 | $1.55 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.00 | $1.41 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $29.0M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $29.0B | $3.9B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $31.6B | — |
| Total Assets | $110.9B | $8.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.92× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 26 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 26 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | $29.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $155.0M | $891.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $814.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $560.0M | $1.2B |
| Q3 26 | — | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $29.0B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $29.0B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $34.9B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $33.3B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $31.6B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $31.0B | — |
| Q3 26 | — | — | ||
| Q1 26 | — | $459.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $31.6B | $-63.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $31.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $31.7B | $-453.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $31.6B | $-829.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $31.2B | $-1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $29.7B | $-1.3B |
| Q3 26 | — | $8.9B | ||
| Q1 26 | — | $8.7B | ||
| Q4 25 | $110.9B | $8.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $106.9B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $99.9B | $8.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.0B | $7.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $96.2B | $8.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $93.7B | $8.0B |
| Q3 26 | — | — | ||
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.92× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.93× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.10× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.05× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.01× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.04× | — |
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 | $1.2B | $2.4B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-2.2B | $953.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -67.7% | 30.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 104.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 3.38× | 3.17× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-6.0B | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 26 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $532.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $784.0M | $508.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.5B | $259.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $221.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | $95.0M |
| Q3 26 | — | $953.0M | ||
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-2.2B | $427.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.5B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.5B | $425.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-854.0M | $216.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.1B | $150.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-913.0M | $27.0M |
| Q3 26 | — | 30.6% | ||
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -67.7% | 16.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -52.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -56.3% | 17.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -23.2% | 10.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -35.4% | 6.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -35.5% | 1.2% |
| Q3 26 | — | — | ||
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 104.0% | 4.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 92.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 85.3% | 3.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 63.5% | 2.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 79.9% | 3.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 75.3% | 3.1% |
| Q3 26 | — | 3.17× | ||
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.38× | 0.97× | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.68× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.66× | 1.04× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.62× | 0.76× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.02× | 0.66× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.57× | 0.31× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
