vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CMS Energy (CMS) and Pinnacle West Capital (PNW), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
CMS Energy is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.1B vs $1.1B, roughly 1.9× Pinnacle West Capital). CMS Energy runs the higher net margin — 13.5% vs 1.6%, a 12.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, CMS Energy posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (13.0% vs 3.0%). Over the past eight quarters, Pinnacle West Capital's revenue compounded faster (8.9% CAGR vs -0.2%).
CMS Energy Corporation is an American energy company based in Jackson, Michigan, that is focused principally on utility operations in Michigan. Its principal business is Consumers Energy, a public utility that provides electricity and natural gas to more than 6 million of Michigan's 10 million residents. Its non-utility businesses are focused primarily on domestic independent power production. Consumers Energy has operated since 1886.
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation is an American utility holding company that owns Arizona Public Service (APS). It is publicly traded on the New York Stock exchange and a component of the S&P 500 stock market index. APS is the largest utility company in Arizona and is regulated by the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC).
CMS vs PNW — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.1B | $1.1B |
| Net Profit | $289.0M | $17.6M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 20.4% | 10.7% |
| Net Margin | 13.5% | 1.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 13.0% | 3.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 9.1% | 798.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.94 | $0.12 |
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 | $2.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.7B | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | $951.7M |
| Q4 25 | $289.0M | $17.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $277.0M | $417.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $201.0M | $196.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $304.0M | $-338.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $265.0M | $-2.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $253.0M | $399.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $198.0M | $208.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $287.0M | $21.2M |
| Q4 25 | 20.4% | 10.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.4% | 32.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.6% | 22.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.6% | 5.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.5% | 7.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 21.4% | 30.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.0% | 24.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 19.2% | 7.0% |
| Q4 25 | 13.5% | 1.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.0% | 22.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.2% | 14.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.7% | -0.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.0% | -0.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.8% | 22.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.6% | 15.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.4% | 2.2% |
| Q4 25 | $0.94 | $0.12 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.92 | $3.39 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.66 | $1.58 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.01 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.88 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.84 | $3.37 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.65 | $1.76 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.96 | $0.15 |
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 | $509.0M | $6.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $9.1B | $7.0B |
| Total Assets | $39.9B | $30.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $509.0M | $6.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $362.0M | $30.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $844.0M | $18.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $465.0M | $10.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $103.0M | $3.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $412.0M | $49.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $699.0M | $4.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $802.0M | $9.6M |
| Q4 25 | $9.1B | $7.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.9B | $7.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.4B | $6.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $8.3B | $6.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.2B | $6.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.1B | $6.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.0B | $6.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.9B | $6.2B |
| Q4 25 | $39.9B | $30.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $38.0B | $29.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $37.7B | $29.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $36.3B | $27.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $35.9B | $26.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $34.8B | $26.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $34.4B | $25.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $33.9B | $24.8B |
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 | $478.0M | $476.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-192.7M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -17.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | 59.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.65× | 27.09× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-819.5M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $478.0M | $476.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $343.0M | $665.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $414.0M | $261.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $401.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $403.0M | $439.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $304.0M | $633.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $707.0M | $189.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $956.0M | $347.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-192.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-635.0M | $42.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-470.0M | $-448.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $112.0M | $-220.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-92.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-502.0M | $-32.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $26.0M | $-344.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $343.0M | $-170.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | -17.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | -32.2% | 2.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -26.1% | -33.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.7% | -21.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -8.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | -29.3% | -1.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.6% | -26.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 16.0% | -17.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | 59.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 49.5% | 34.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 49.2% | 52.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 37.0% | 60.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 48.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 47.1% | 37.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 43.2% | 40.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 28.6% | 54.4% |
| Q4 25 | 1.65× | 27.09× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.24× | 1.59× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.06× | 1.33× | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.29× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.52× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.20× | 1.59× | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.57× | 0.91× | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.33× | 16.41× |
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
CMS
| Electric Utility | $1.3B | 59% |
| Gas Utility | $803.0M | 38% |
| North Star Clean Energy | $77.0M | 4% |
PNW
| Electricand Transmission Service | $1.1B | 100% |
| Other Services | $4.4M | 0% |
