vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Celanese Corp (CE) and Linde plc (LIN), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Linde plc is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($8.8B vs $2.2B, roughly 4.0× Celanese Corp). Linde plc runs the higher net margin — 0.6% vs 17.5%, a 16.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Linde plc posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (5.8% vs -7.0%). Linde plc produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.6B vs $168.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Linde plc's revenue compounded faster (4.0% CAGR vs -8.1%).
Celanese Corporation, formerly known as Hoechst Celanese, is an American technology and specialty materials company headquartered in Irving, Texas. It is a Fortune 500 corporation. The company is the world's leading producer of acetic acid, producing about 1.95 million tonnes per year, representing approximately 20% of global production. Celanese is also the world's largest producer of vinyl acetate monomer (VAM).
Linde is a global multinational chemical company and the world's largest industrial gas supplier by market share and revenue. Founded by German scientist and engineer Carl von Linde in 1879 in Wiesbaden, Germany, the company is now headquartered in Woking, United Kingdom, and registered in Ireland as Linde plc. Linde plc was formed in 2018 through the merger of Linde AG and Praxair, which was founded in 1907 in the United States as Linde Air Products Company.
CE vs LIN — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.2B | $8.8B |
| Net Profit | $14.0M | $1.5B |
| Gross Margin | 19.1% | — |
| Operating Margin | 4.0% | 23.0% |
| Net Margin | 0.6% | 17.5% |
| Revenue YoY | -7.0% | 5.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 100.7% | -11.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.13 | $3.28 |
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 | $2.2B | $8.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4B | $8.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | $8.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | $8.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.4B | $8.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.6B | $8.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.7B | $8.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.6B | $8.1B |
| Q4 25 | $14.0M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.4B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $199.0M | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $-21.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.9B | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $116.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $155.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $121.0M | $1.6B |
| Q4 25 | 19.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 21.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 24.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 21.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | 4.0% | 23.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -52.7% | 27.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.2% | 27.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.0% | 26.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | -59.3% | 27.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.4% | 25.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.4% | 26.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.0% | 25.9% |
| Q4 25 | 0.6% | 17.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -56.1% | 22.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.9% | 20.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.9% | 20.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -80.8% | 20.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.4% | 18.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.8% | 20.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.6% | 20.1% |
| Q4 25 | $0.13 | $3.28 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-12.39 | $4.09 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.81 | $3.73 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.19 | $3.51 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-17.50 | $3.61 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.06 | $3.22 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.41 | $3.44 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.10 | $3.35 |
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 | — | $5.1B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $11.4B | $20.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $4.0B | $38.2B |
| Total Assets | $21.7B | $86.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 2.81× | 0.54× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | $5.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $5.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $5.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $4.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $4.8B |
| Q4 25 | $11.4B | $20.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.7B | $18.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.7B | $19.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.4B | $17.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.1B | $15.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.3B | $17.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.1B | $16.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.0B | $15.2B |
| Q4 25 | $4.0B | $38.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.0B | $38.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.3B | $38.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.2B | $38.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.2B | $38.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.3B | $39.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.2B | $38.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.1B | $38.8B |
| Q4 25 | $21.7B | $86.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.2B | $86.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.7B | $86.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.2B | $82.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $22.9B | $80.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $25.9B | $82.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.8B | $80.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $26.0B | $80.3B |
| Q4 25 | 2.81× | 0.54× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.95× | 0.48× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.41× | 0.51× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.39× | 0.46× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.14× | 0.40× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.56× | 0.45× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.54× | 0.44× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.56× | 0.39× |
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 | $252.0M | $3.0B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $168.0M | $1.6B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 7.6% | 17.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 3.8% | 16.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 18.00× | 1.98× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $803.0M | $5.1B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $252.0M | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $447.0M | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $410.0M | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $37.0M | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $494.0M | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $79.0M | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $292.0M | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $101.0M | $2.0B |
| Q4 25 | $168.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $383.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $317.0M | $954.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-65.0M | $891.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $389.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $187.0M | $796.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-36.0M | $906.0M |
| Q4 25 | 7.6% | 17.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.8% | 19.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.5% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.7% | 11.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.4% | 18.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.3% | 19.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.1% | 9.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.4% | 11.2% |
| Q4 25 | 3.8% | 16.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.6% | 14.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.7% | 14.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | 15.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.4% | 15.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.3% | 12.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 13.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.2% | 12.9% |
| Q4 25 | 18.00× | 1.98× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.53× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.06× | 1.25× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.29× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.63× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.68× | 1.76× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.88× | 1.16× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.83× | 1.20× |
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
CE
| Engineered Materials | $1.3B | 58% |
| Acetyl Chain | $940.0M | 43% |
LIN
| Other | $4.9B | 56% |
| Packaged Gas | $1.6B | 19% |
| Merchant | $1.2B | 14% |
| On Site | $950.0M | 11% |
| Other Distribution Methods | $64.0M | 1% |
