vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Aramark (ARMK) and FARMER BROTHERS CO (FARM), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Aramark is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.8B vs $88.9M, roughly 54.3× FARMER BROTHERS CO). Aramark runs the higher net margin — 2.0% vs -5.5%, a 7.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Aramark posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (6.1% vs -1.2%). FARMER BROTHERS CO produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-2.6M vs $-904.4M). Over the past eight quarters, Aramark's revenue compounded faster (7.3% CAGR vs 2.1%).
Aramark is an American food service and facilities services provider to clients in areas including education, prisons, healthcare, business, and leisure. It operates in North America and an additional 14 countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Chile, Ireland, and Spain.
Farmer Bros. Co. is an American coffee foodservice company based in Fort Worth, Texas. The company specializes in the manufacture and distribution of coffee, tea, and approximately 300 other foodservice items used by restaurants and other establishments. John Moore serves as the company's president and chief executive officer.
ARMK vs FARM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 2026 vs Q2 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.8B | $88.9M |
| Net Profit | $96.2M | $-4.9M |
| Gross Margin | — | 36.3% |
| Operating Margin | 4.5% | -4.7% |
| Net Margin | 2.0% | -5.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 6.1% | -1.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -9.0% | -2417.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.36 | $-0.22 |
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.
| Q1 26 | $4.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.0B | $88.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $81.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.6B | $85.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.3B | $82.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.6B | $90.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.4B | $85.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.4B | $84.4M |
| Q1 26 | $96.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $87.1M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-4.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $71.8M | $-4.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $61.9M | $-5.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $105.6M | $210.0K | ||
| Q3 24 | $122.4M | $-5.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.1M | $-4.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 36.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 39.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 44.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 42.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 43.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 43.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 38.8% |
| Q1 26 | 4.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.3% | -4.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -3.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.9% | 4.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.1% | -4.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.8% | 1.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.0% | -3.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.7% | -4.9% |
| Q1 26 | 2.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.7% | -5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -4.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.6% | -5.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.4% | -6.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.3% | 0.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.8% | -5.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.3% | -5.4% |
| Q1 26 | $0.36 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.33 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.19 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.27 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.23 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.39 | $0.01 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.46 | $-0.24 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.22 | $-0.23 |
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 | $439.6M | $4.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $6.2B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.2B | $35.7M |
| Total Assets | $13.5B | $151.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.94× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | $439.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $639.1M | $4.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $501.5M | $6.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $920.5M | $4.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $484.1M | $5.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $672.5M | $3.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $436.1M | $5.8M |
| Q1 26 | $6.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.4B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.3B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.1B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.0B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.3B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.0B | — |
| Q1 26 | $3.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.1B | $35.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $40.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.1B | $43.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.0B | $37.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1B | $41.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.0B | $40.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.9B | $45.5M |
| Q1 26 | $13.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $13.3B | $151.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $158.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.3B | $161.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.5B | $163.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.7B | $179.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.7B | $182.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.5B | $185.2M |
| Q1 26 | 1.94× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.71× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.03× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.02× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.61× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.42× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.71× | — |
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 | $-782.2M | $-786.0K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-904.4M | $-2.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -18.7% | -2.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 2.5% | 2.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | -8.13× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | $-782.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-786.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-5.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $76.7M | $9.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $255.9M | $1.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-587.2M | $2.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | $2.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $140.7M | $-995.0K |
| Q1 26 | $-904.4M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-2.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-6.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-34.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $140.1M | $-684.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $-707.0M | $521.0K | ||
| Q3 24 | $882.3M | $-837.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $55.6M | — |
| Q1 26 | -18.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -2.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -8.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.3% | -0.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -15.5% | 0.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.0% | -1.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.3% | — |
| Q1 26 | 2.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.8% | 2.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.7% | 2.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.6% | 2.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.2% | 3.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | -8.13× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.07× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.14× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -5.56× | 12.16× | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.35× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.42× | — |
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
ARMK
| Education | $1.1B | 22% |
| Sports Leisure Corrections | $961.2M | 20% |
| Food And Support Services International | $847.8M | 18% |
| Other | $621.6M | 13% |
| Businessand Industry | $510.6M | 11% |
| Health Care | $421.3M | 9% |
| Facility Services | $382.9M | 8% |
FARM
| Coffee Roasted | $45.5M | 51% |
| Tea Iced Hot | $23.3M | 26% |
| Culinary | $14.1M | 16% |
| Spice | $4.9M | 5% |
| Fuel Surcharge | $1.2M | 1% |
