vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Ball Corporation (BALL) and Steel Dynamics (STLD), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Steel Dynamics is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.4B vs $3.3B, roughly 1.3× Ball Corporation). Steel Dynamics runs the higher net margin — 6.0% vs 6.0%, a 0.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Ball Corporation posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (16.2% vs 14.0%). Ball Corporation produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.0B vs $84.2M). Over the past eight quarters, Ball Corporation's revenue compounded faster (7.9% CAGR vs -3.0%).
A ball is a round object with several uses. It is used in ball games, where the play of the game follows the state of the ball as it is hit, kicked or thrown by players. Balls can also be used for simpler activities, such as catch or juggling. Balls made from hard-wearing materials are used in engineering applications to provide very low friction bearings, known as ball bearings. Black-powder weapons use stone and metal balls as projectiles.
Steel Dynamics, Inc. (SDI) is an American steel producer based in Fort Wayne, Indiana. With a production capacity of 13 million tons of steel, the company is the third largest producer of carbon steel products in the United States. It is among the most profitable American steel companies in terms of profit margins and operating margin per ton. Based on its 2021 revenue, the company ranked 196th on the 2022 edition of the Fortune 500.
BALL vs STLD — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.3B | $4.4B |
| Net Profit | $200.0M | $266.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | 12.0% |
| Operating Margin | 7.2% | 7.0% |
| Net Margin | 6.0% | 6.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 16.2% | 14.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 766.7% | 28.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.73 | $1.80 |
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 | $3.3B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4B | $4.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.3B | $4.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.1B | $4.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.9B | $3.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.1B | $4.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.0B | $4.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.9B | $4.7B |
| Q4 25 | $200.0M | $266.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $321.0M | $403.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $215.0M | $298.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $179.0M | $217.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-30.0M | $207.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $199.0M | $317.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $159.0M | $428.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.7B | $584.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 12.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 15.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 13.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 11.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 11.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.7% | 13.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.5% | 16.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 16.6% | 20.9% |
| Q4 25 | 7.2% | 7.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.6% | 10.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.0% | 8.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.4% | 6.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.2% | 6.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.4% | 9.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.8% | 12.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 6.8% | 16.0% |
| Q4 25 | 6.0% | 6.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.5% | 8.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.4% | 6.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.8% | 5.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -1.0% | 5.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.5% | 7.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.4% | 9.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 128.3% | 12.4% |
| Q4 25 | $0.73 | $1.80 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.18 | $2.74 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.76 | $2.01 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.63 | $1.44 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.23 | $1.40 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.65 | $2.05 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.51 | $2.72 | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.61 | $3.67 |
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 | $1.2B | $769.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $7.0B | $4.2B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $5.4B | $9.0B |
| Total Assets | $19.5B | $16.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.29× | 0.47× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $769.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $568.0M | $770.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $296.0M | $497.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $449.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $885.0M | $737.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7B | $1.7B |
| Q4 25 | $7.0B | $4.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.9B | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.5B | $3.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.1B | $4.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.3B | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.4B | $3.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.5B | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.5B | $3.1B |
| Q4 25 | $5.4B | $9.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.4B | $9.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.2B | $8.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.5B | $8.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.9B | $8.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.7B | $9.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.9B | $9.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.3B | $9.1B |
| Q4 25 | $19.5B | $16.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.7B | $16.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.6B | $15.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $18.0B | $15.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.6B | $14.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.8B | $15.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.0B | $15.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $19.9B | $15.0B |
| Q4 25 | 1.29× | 0.47× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.26× | 0.42× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.24× | 0.43× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.12× | 0.48× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.91× | 0.36× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.80× | 0.41× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.80× | 0.34× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.76× | 0.34× |
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 | $1.2B | $272.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.0B | $84.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 31.1% | 1.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 5.1% | 4.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 6.05× | 1.03× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $788.0M | $501.5M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $272.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $384.0M | $722.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $332.0M | $301.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-665.0M | $152.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $500.0M | $346.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $610.0M | $759.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $252.0M | $382.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.2B | $355.2M |
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $84.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $257.0M | $556.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $236.0M | $13.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-746.0M | $-152.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $393.0M | $-106.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $493.0M | $138.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $146.0M | $-36.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.4B | $-19.1M |
| Q4 25 | 31.1% | 1.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.6% | 11.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.1% | 0.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -24.1% | -3.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.6% | -2.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.0% | 3.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.9% | -0.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | -48.7% | -0.4% |
| Q4 25 | 5.1% | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.8% | 3.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.9% | 6.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.6% | 7.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.7% | 11.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.8% | 14.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.6% | 9.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.4% | 8.0% |
| Q4 25 | 6.05× | 1.03× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.20× | 1.79× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.54× | 1.01× | ||
| Q1 25 | -3.72× | 0.70× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.67× | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.07× | 2.39× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.58× | 0.89× | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.34× | 0.61× |
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
BALL
| Transferred Over Time | $2.7B | 82% |
| Transferred At Point In Time | $602.0M | 18% |
STLD
| Steel Operations | $3.1B | 69% |
| Other | $442.1M | 10% |
| Steel Fabrication Operations | $347.2M | 8% |
| Metals Recycling Operations | $321.8M | 7% |
| Aluminum Operations | $157.2M | 4% |
| Related Party | $93.2M | 2% |
