vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CGI INC (GIB) and TD SYNNEX CORP (SNX), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
TD SYNNEX CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($17.4B vs $11.0B, roughly 1.6× CGI INC). TD SYNNEX CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.4B vs $1.4B).
CGI Inc. is a Canadian multinational information technology consulting and software development company headquartered in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. CGI went public in 1986 with a primary listing on the Toronto Stock Exchange. CGI is also a constituent of the S&P/TSX 60 and has a secondary listing on the New York Stock Exchange.
TD Synnex Corporation is an American IT distribution company with a workforce of 22,000 in over 100 countries. It was formed in 2021 by the merger of Synnex and Tech Data. TD Synnex is led by CEO Patrick Zammit.
GIB vs SNX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 2024 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $11.0B | $17.4B |
| Net Profit | — | $248.4M |
| Gross Margin | — | 6.9% |
| Operating Margin | — | 2.3% |
| Net Margin | — | 1.4% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 9.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 27.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $3.02 |
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 | — | $17.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $15.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $14.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $14.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $15.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $14.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.0B | $13.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $14.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | $248.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $226.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $184.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $167.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $194.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $178.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $143.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $172.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | 6.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 7.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 6.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 6.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 6.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 7.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | $3.02 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.74 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.21 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.98 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.28 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.08 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.66 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.93 |
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 | — | $2.4B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $3.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $8.5B |
| Total Assets | — | $34.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.43× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $874.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $767.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $541.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $853.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $3.1B |
| Q4 25 | — | $8.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $8.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $8.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $8.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $8.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $8.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $8.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $8.1B |
| Q4 25 | — | $34.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $31.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $30.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $28.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $30.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $29.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $27.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $27.8B |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.43× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.36× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.45× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.46× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.46× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.46× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.47× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.38× |
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 | $1.5B | $1.5B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.4B | $1.4B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 12.3% | 8.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 1.1% | 0.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | 5.88× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $1.4B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $246.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $573.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-748.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $561.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $385.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $-114.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $384.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $213.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $542.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-789.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $512.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $338.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $-152.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $343.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -5.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.3% | -1.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.1% | 0.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.88× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.09× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.10× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -4.46× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.88× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.16× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -0.80× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.24× |
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.
