vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of エルビット・システムズ (OSS) and Rafael Holdings, Inc. (RFL), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
エルビット・システムズ runs the higher net margin — -68.7% vs -4090.0%, a 4021.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Rafael Holdings, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (87.5% vs 13.9%). Over the past eight quarters, Rafael Holdings, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (85.2% CAGR vs NaN%).
エルビット・システムズはイスラエルに本拠を置く国際的な軍事技術企業であり、大手国防関連企業です。1966年にエルロンによって設立され、イスラエル軍に対し陸上装備や無人航空機の主要供給元を務めており、イスラエル国防産業において重要な位置を占めています。
ラファエル・アドバンスト・ディフェンス・システムズはイスラエルの国防テクノロジー企業です。元々はイスラエル国防省傘下で武器・軍事技術を開発する国家国防開発研究所として設立され、2002年に有限会社として法人化されました。各種先進国防装備と軍事技術の開発・生産を手がけています。
OSS vs RFL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q1 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $-12.9M | $240.0K |
| Net Profit | $8.9M | $-9.8M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -4225.4% |
| Net Margin | -68.7% | -4090.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 13.9% | 87.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | 382.7% | -9.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.39 | $-0.19 |
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 | $-12.9M | $240.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-15.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.7M | $165.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.2M | $336.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $12.7M | $68.0K |
| Q4 25 | $8.9M | $-9.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $263.5K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-3.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-6.8M | $-4.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-2.3M | $-32.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.3M | $6.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 35.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 31.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 32.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -12.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 25.2% | 74.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 29.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -4225.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -12.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -15.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -49.1% | -2330.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -17.1% | -27726.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | -10.0% | -4622.1% |
| Q4 25 | -68.7% | -4090.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -14.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -16.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 20.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -49.7% | -2707.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -17.8% | -9628.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | -10.6% | 8892.6% |
| Q4 25 | $0.39 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.01 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.16 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.32 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.11 | $-1.36 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.06 | $0.25 |
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 | $31.2M | $45.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $46.0M | $85.2M |
| Total Assets | $52.8M | $105.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $31.2M | $45.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.6M | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.8M | $7.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $12.9M | $7.1M |
| Q4 25 | $46.0M | $85.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $26.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $26.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $26.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $27.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $30.6M | $82.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $36.5M | $86.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $38.4M | $104.9M |
| Q4 25 | $52.8M | $105.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $43.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $39.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $37.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $36.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $43.7M | $96.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $47.4M | $101.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $48.3M | $106.1M |
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 | — | $-6.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | -2.7% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | — | $-6.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-3.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-368.7K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-2.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $916.8K | $-2.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-816.6K | $-251.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.0M | $-2.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-3.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-529.2K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-2.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $822.1K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-853.6K | $-375.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -19.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -9.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -6.5% | -111.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 14.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | -2.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.3% | 36.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.3% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -12.98× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -0.42× |
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.
