vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Thryv Holdings, Inc. (THRY) and UNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS INC (USLM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Thryv Holdings, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($167.7M vs $87.9M, roughly 1.9× UNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS INC). UNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS INC runs the higher net margin — 34.7% vs 2.7%, a 32.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, UNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (9.8% vs -7.5%). UNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($25.7M vs $-5.5M). Over the past eight quarters, UNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS INC's revenue compounded faster (10.8% CAGR vs -13.5%).
Thryv Holdings, Inc. is a publicly traded software as a service (SaaS) company, providing customer relationship management and online reputation management software for small businesses. It has headquarters in Dallas, Texas, and operates in 48 states across the United States of America with more than 2,400 employees. The company began as a conglomerate of Yellow Pages companies. In June 2020, Thryv reported $1.3 billion in revenue over a twelve-month period.
United States Lime & Minerals Inc is a leading US-based natural resources enterprise that produces high-calcium lime, dolomitic lime, limestone and related mineral products. Its core client segments cover infrastructure construction, steel manufacturing, agricultural soil amendment, environmental emission control and industrial processing, serving customers across North America.
THRY vs USLM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $167.7M | $87.9M |
| Net Profit | $4.5M | $30.5M |
| Gross Margin | 65.2% | 48.0% |
| Operating Margin | 37.3% | 41.0% |
| Net Margin | 2.7% | 34.7% |
| Revenue YoY | -7.5% | 9.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 147.2% | 13.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.10 | $1.06 |
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 | $167.7M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $191.6M | $87.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $201.6M | $102.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $210.5M | $91.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $181.4M | $91.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $186.6M | $80.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $179.9M | $89.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $224.1M | $76.5M |
| Q1 26 | $4.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-9.7M | $30.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.7M | $38.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.9M | $30.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-9.6M | $34.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.9M | $27.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-96.1M | $33.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.5M | $26.1M |
| Q1 26 | 65.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 68.0% | 48.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 67.7% | 51.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 69.7% | 45.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 65.8% | 50.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 65.9% | 44.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 62.3% | 48.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 66.3% | 45.5% |
| Q1 26 | 37.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.3% | 41.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.9% | 45.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.0% | 39.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.7% | 43.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.9% | 38.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -49.2% | 42.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.0% | 39.1% |
| Q1 26 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -5.0% | 34.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.8% | 38.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.6% | 33.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -5.3% | 37.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.2% | 33.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -53.4% | 37.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.5% | 34.0% |
| Q1 26 | $0.10 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.21 | $1.06 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.13 | $1.35 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.31 | $1.07 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.22 | $1.19 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.28 | $-2.20 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.65 | $1.16 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.15 | $0.91 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $8.0M | $371.1M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $0 |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $225.4M | $630.8M |
| Total Assets | $693.7M | $681.0M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.00× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $8.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $10.8M | $371.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.6M | $349.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.8M | $319.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.0M | $300.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.3M | $278.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.5M | $255.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.5M | $222.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $253.5M | $0 | ||
| Q3 25 | $268.2M | $0 | ||
| Q2 25 | $275.6M | $0 | ||
| Q1 25 | $299.0M | $0 | ||
| Q4 24 | $284.3M | $0 | ||
| Q3 24 | $307.8M | $0 | ||
| Q2 24 | $342.1M | $0 |
| Q1 26 | $225.4M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $218.1M | $630.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $221.1M | $602.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $214.9M | $563.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $193.2M | $532.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $196.9M | $497.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $94.5M | $474.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $183.1M | $441.1M |
| Q1 26 | $693.7M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $688.6M | $681.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $701.8M | $652.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $687.7M | $607.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $703.7M | $585.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $712.2M | $543.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $654.8M | $521.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $785.5M | $484.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.16× | 0.00× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.21× | 0.00× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.28× | 0.00× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.55× | 0.00× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.44× | 0.00× | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.26× | 0.00× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.87× | 0.00× |
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 | — | $45.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-5.5M | $25.7M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -3.3% | 29.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 22.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.49× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $43.3M | $102.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $22.2M | $45.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.2M | $45.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $29.6M | $34.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.5M | $39.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $26.1M | $38.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $36.0M | $39.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $22.2M | $21.2M |
| Q1 26 | $-5.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $12.3M | $25.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.6M | $31.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $21.8M | $20.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-17.6M | $24.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.3M | $27.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $27.5M | $33.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.3M | $16.8M |
| Q1 26 | -3.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 6.4% | 29.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.2% | 30.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.4% | 22.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -9.7% | 26.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.3% | 34.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.3% | 37.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.9% | 21.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.2% | 22.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.8% | 14.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.7% | 14.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.9% | 16.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.7% | 13.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.7% | 5.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 5.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.49× | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.93× | 1.18× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.12× | 1.10× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.16× | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.32× | 1.43× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.17× | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.01× | 0.81× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
THRY
| SaaS | $116.7M | 70% |
| Other | $50.9M | 30% |
USLM
Segment breakdown not available.
