vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Crane Co (CR) and RBC Bearings INC (RBC), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Crane Co is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($581.0M vs $461.6M, roughly 1.3× RBC Bearings INC). RBC Bearings INC runs the higher net margin — 14.1% vs 14.6%, a 0.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, RBC Bearings INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (17.0% vs 6.8%). Crane Co produced more free cash flow last quarter ($196.0M vs $99.1M). Over the past eight quarters, Crane Co's revenue compounded faster (6.7% CAGR vs 5.6%).
Crane Co. is an American industrial products company based in Stamford, Connecticut. Founded by Richard Teller Crane in 1855, it became one of the leading manufacturers of bathroom fixtures in the United States, until 1990, when that division was sold off. In 1960 it began the process of becoming a holding company with a diverse portfolio. Its business segments are Aerospace & Electronics, Engineered Materials, Fluid Handling, and Controls. Industries served by these segments include chemical...
Dover Corporation is an American conglomerate manufacturer of industrial products. The Downers Grove, Illinois-based company was founded in 1955. As of 2021, Dover's business was divided into five segments: Engineered Products, Clean Energy and Fueling, Imaging & Identification, Pumps & Process Solutions and Climate and Sustainability Technologies. Dover is a constituent of the S&P 500 index and trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol DOV. Dover was ranked 448 in the 2024 Fortu...
CR vs RBC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q3 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $581.0M | $461.6M |
| Net Profit | $81.7M | $67.4M |
| Gross Margin | 41.6% | 44.3% |
| Operating Margin | 17.5% | 22.3% |
| Net Margin | 14.1% | 14.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 6.8% | 17.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 0.9% | 16.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.40 | $2.13 |
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 | $581.0M | $461.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $589.2M | $455.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $577.2M | $436.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $557.6M | $437.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $544.1M | $394.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $548.3M | $397.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $528.6M | $406.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $510.2M | $413.7M |
| Q4 25 | $81.7M | $67.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $91.4M | $60.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $86.4M | $68.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $107.1M | $72.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $81.0M | $57.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $77.3M | $54.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $71.6M | $61.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $64.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | 41.6% | 44.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 42.7% | 44.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 42.0% | 44.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 42.6% | 44.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 40.9% | 44.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 41.4% | 43.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 40.0% | 45.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 40.5% | 43.1% |
| Q4 25 | 17.5% | 22.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.1% | 21.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.8% | 23.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.1% | 23.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.8% | 21.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.1% | 21.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.9% | 24.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.9% | 22.8% |
| Q4 25 | 14.1% | 14.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.5% | 13.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.0% | 15.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.2% | 16.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.9% | 14.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.1% | 13.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.5% | 15.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 12.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.40 | $2.13 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.56 | $1.90 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.47 | $2.17 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.83 | $2.33 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.37 | $1.82 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.33 | $1.65 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.23 | $1.90 | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.12 | $1.92 |
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 | $506.5M | $107.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.1B | $990.2M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.1B | $3.3B |
| Total Assets | $3.9B | $5.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.56× | 0.30× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $506.5M | $107.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $388.2M | $91.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $332.2M | $132.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $435.1M | $36.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $306.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $258.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $229.3M | $76.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $219.4M | $63.5M |
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $990.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $915.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $920.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $247.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.2B |
| Q4 25 | $2.1B | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $3.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8B | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | $2.8B |
| Q4 25 | $3.9B | $5.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5B | $5.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | $4.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.6B | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.6B | $4.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.7B | $4.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.5B | $4.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.4B | $4.7B |
| Q4 25 | 0.56× | 0.30× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.34× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.29× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.30× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.15× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.43× |
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 | $205.8M | $122.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $196.0M | $99.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 33.7% | 21.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 1.7% | 5.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 2.52× | 1.81× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $341.3M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $205.8M | $122.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $130.2M | $88.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $105.0M | $120.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-46.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $202.0M | $84.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $75.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $51.3M | $97.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-70.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $196.0M | $99.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $116.8M | $71.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $88.9M | $104.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-60.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $188.2M | $73.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $67.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $44.6M | $88.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-78.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | 33.7% | 21.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.8% | 15.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.4% | 23.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -10.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.6% | 18.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.4% | 21.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | -15.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.7% | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.3% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.8% | 3.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.5% | 3.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.5% | 2.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.5% | 4.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.3% | 2.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.6% | — |
| Q4 25 | 2.52× | 1.81× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.42× | 1.47× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.22× | 1.75× | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.43× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.49× | 1.45× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.98× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.72× | 1.59× | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.09× | — |
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
CR
| Process Valvesand Related Products | $234.7M | 40% |
| Commercial Original Equipment | $107.2M | 18% |
| Militaryand Other Original Equipment | $76.2M | 13% |
| Commercial Aftermarket Products | $62.9M | 11% |
| Pumps Systems | $40.0M | 7% |
| Commercial Valves | $34.7M | 6% |
| Military Aftermarket Products | $25.3M | 4% |
RBC
| Domestic | $413.3M | 90% |
| Foreign | $48.3M | 10% |
