vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of American Water Works (AWK) and CenterPoint Energy (CNP), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
CenterPoint Energy is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.4B vs $1.3B, roughly 1.9× American Water Works). American Water Works runs the higher net margin — 18.7% vs 10.8%, a 7.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, CenterPoint Energy posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (10.7% vs 5.8%). American Water Works produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-385.0M vs $-707.0M). Over the past eight quarters, American Water Works's revenue compounded faster (12.6% CAGR vs -3.1%).
American Water Works Company, Inc., through its subsidiaries, provides water and wastewater services in the United States. It offers water and wastewater services to approximately 1,700 communities in 14 states serving approximately 3.4 million active customers. The company serves residential customers; commercial customers, including food and beverage providers, commercial property developers and proprietors, and energy suppliers; fire service and private fire customers; industrial customers...
CenterPoint Energy, Inc. is an American utility company based in Houston, Texas, that provides electric and natural gas utility to customers in several markets in the American states of Indiana, Ohio, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, and Texas. Part of the Fortune 500, the company was formerly known as Reliant Energy, NorAm Energy, Houston Industries, and HL&P. The company is headquartered in the CenterPoint Energy Tower at 1111 Louisiana Street in Downtown Houston.
AWK vs CNP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.3B | $2.4B |
| Net Profit | $238.0M | $264.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 31.9% | 22.2% |
| Net Margin | 18.7% | 10.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 5.8% | 10.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | -0.4% | 6.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.22 | $0.40 |
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.
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.0B | $2.6B |
| Q4 25 | $238.0M | $264.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $379.0M | $293.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $289.0M | $198.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $205.0M | $297.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $239.0M | $248.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $350.0M | $193.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $277.0M | $228.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $185.0M | $350.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 99.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 99.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 100.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 100.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 99.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 100.0% |
| Q4 25 | 31.9% | 22.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 42.2% | 25.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 38.4% | 21.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 32.7% | 22.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 33.3% | 21.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 40.9% | 22.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.4% | 24.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 32.5% | 23.7% |
| Q4 25 | 18.7% | 10.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.1% | 14.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.7% | 10.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.1% | 10.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.9% | 11.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.4% | 10.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 24.3% | 12.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 18.4% | 13.5% |
| Q4 25 | $1.22 | $0.40 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.94 | $0.45 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.48 | $0.30 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.05 | $0.45 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.22 | $0.37 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.80 | $0.30 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.42 | $0.36 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.95 | $0.55 |
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 | $98.0M | $548.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $12.8B | $20.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $10.8B | $11.2B |
| Total Assets | $35.4B | $46.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.18× | 1.84× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $98.0M | $548.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $166.0M | $616.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $94.0M | $776.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $114.0M | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $96.0M | $585.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $127.0M | $643.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $48.0M | $543.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $584.0M | $619.0M |
| Q4 25 | $12.8B | $20.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.0B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.3B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.3B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.5B | $20.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.6B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.6B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $12.6B | — |
| Q4 25 | $10.8B | $11.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.9B | $11.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.7B | $11.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.5B | $11.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.3B | $10.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $10.4B | $10.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.2B | $10.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.0B | $10.0B |
| Q4 25 | $35.4B | $46.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $34.7B | $45.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $33.9B | $44.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $33.2B | $44.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $32.8B | $43.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $31.8B | $42.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $31.2B | $41.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $31.1B | $40.2B |
| Q4 25 | 1.18× | 1.84× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.19× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.15× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.26× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.21× | 1.91× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.21× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.24× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.26× | — |
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 | $663.0M | $774.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-385.0M | $-707.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -30.3% | -29.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 82.5% | 60.7% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 2.79× | 2.93× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-1.1B | $-2.4B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $663.0M | $774.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $764.0M | $742.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $301.0M | $560.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $331.0M | $410.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $639.0M | $889.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $679.0M | $136.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $345.0M | $576.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $382.0M | $538.0M |
| Q4 25 | $-385.0M | $-707.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-33.0M | $-480.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-432.0M | $-569.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-217.0M | $-628.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-255.0M | $-1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $-4.0M | $-708.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-325.0M | $-236.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-227.0M | $-307.0M |
| Q4 25 | -30.3% | -29.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.3% | -24.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -34.0% | -29.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -19.1% | -21.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -21.2% | -51.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.3% | -38.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -28.5% | -12.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -22.6% | -11.8% |
| Q4 25 | 82.5% | 60.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 54.8% | 61.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 57.6% | 57.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 48.3% | 35.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 74.4% | 91.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 51.4% | 45.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 58.8% | 42.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 60.7% | 32.6% |
| Q4 25 | 2.79× | 2.93× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.02× | 2.53× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.04× | 2.83× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.61× | 1.38× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.67× | 3.58× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.94× | 0.70× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.25× | 2.53× | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.06× | 1.54× |
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
AWK
| Water Services | $1.0B | 81% |
| Other | $127.0M | 10% |
| Wastewater Services | $101.0M | 8% |
| Miscellaneous Utility Charge | $11.0M | 1% |
CNP
| Electric Segment | $945.0M | 39% |
| Electric | $890.0M | 37% |
| Other | $603.0M | 25% |
