vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Aptiv (APTV) and OSHKOSH CORP (OSK), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Aptiv is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($5.2B vs $2.7B, roughly 1.9× OSHKOSH CORP). OSHKOSH CORP runs the higher net margin — 2.7% vs 5.0%, a 2.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Aptiv posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (5.0% vs 3.5%). Aptiv produced more free cash flow last quarter ($651.0M vs $540.3M). Over the past eight quarters, OSHKOSH CORP's revenue compounded faster (2.8% CAGR vs 2.5%).
Aptiv PLC is an American automotive technology supplier with headquarters in Schaffhausen, Switzerland. Aptiv grew out of the now-defunct American company, Delphi Automotive Systems, which itself was formerly a component of General Motors.
Oshkosh Corporation, formerly Oshkosh Truck, is an American industrial company that designs and builds specialty trucks, military vehicles, truck bodies, airport fire apparatus, and access equipment. The corporation also owns Pierce Manufacturing, a fire apparatus manufacturer in Appleton, Wisconsin, and JLG Industries, a manufacturer of lift equipment, including aerial lifts, boom lifts, scissor lifts, telehandlers and low-level access lifts.
APTV vs OSK — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $5.2B | $2.7B |
| Net Profit | $138.0M | $133.8M |
| Gross Margin | 18.7% | 15.8% |
| Operating Margin | 8.2% | 7.9% |
| Net Margin | 2.7% | 5.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 5.0% | 3.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | -48.5% | -12.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.63 | — |
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 | $5.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.8B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.9B | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.9B | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.1B | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.9B | $2.5B |
| Q4 25 | $138.0M | $133.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-355.0M | $196.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $393.0M | $204.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-11.0M | $112.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $268.0M | $153.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $363.0M | $180.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $938.0M | $168.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $218.0M | $179.4M |
| Q4 25 | 18.7% | 15.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.5% | 17.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.1% | 19.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.1% | 17.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.6% | 17.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.6% | 18.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.2% | 19.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 17.9% | 18.5% |
| Q4 25 | 8.2% | 7.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -3.4% | 9.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | 10.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.3% | 7.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.8% | 8.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.4% | 9.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.7% | 9.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.5% | 10.2% |
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -6.8% | 7.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.5% | 7.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.2% | 4.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.5% | 5.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.5% | 6.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 18.6% | 5.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.4% | 7.1% |
| Q4 25 | $0.63 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.63 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.80 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.05 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.22 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.48 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.47 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.79 | — |
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 | $1.9B | $479.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $7.5B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $9.2B | $4.5B |
| Total Assets | $23.4B | $10.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.81× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $479.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $211.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $191.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $210.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $204.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | $160.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2B | $141.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $941.0M | $69.9M |
| Q4 25 | $7.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $7.6B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.8B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.6B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.8B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.3B | $602.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.5B | $599.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.7B | $598.9M |
| Q4 25 | $9.2B | $4.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.3B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.7B | $4.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.0B | $4.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.8B | $4.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.9B | $4.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.5B | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.1B | $3.8B |
| Q4 25 | $23.4B | $10.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $23.5B | $9.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.9B | $10.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.1B | $9.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $23.5B | $9.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $24.8B | $9.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $24.8B | $9.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $23.6B | $9.5B |
| Q4 25 | 0.81× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.82× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.80× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.85× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.89× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.93× | 0.15× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.48× | 0.15× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.42× | 0.16× |
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 | $818.0M | $600.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $651.0M | $540.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 12.6% | 20.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 3.2% | 2.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 5.93× | 4.49× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.5B | $618.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $818.0M | $600.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $584.0M | $489.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $510.0M | $89.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $273.0M | $-394.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $790.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $499.0M | $326.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $643.0M | $-211.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $244.0M | $-355.8M |
| Q4 25 | $651.0M | $540.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $441.0M | $464.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $361.0M | $48.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $76.0M | $-435.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $894.0M | $703.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $326.0M | $272.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $417.0M | $-250.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-21.0M | $-455.9M |
| Q4 25 | 12.6% | 20.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.5% | 17.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.9% | 1.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.6% | -18.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 18.2% | 27.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.7% | 9.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.3% | -8.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.4% | -17.9% |
| Q4 25 | 3.2% | 2.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.7% | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.9% | 1.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.1% | 1.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.4% | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.6% | 2.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.5% | 1.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.4% | 3.9% |
| Q4 25 | 5.93× | 4.49× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.49× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.30× | 0.44× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -3.52× | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.96× | 5.17× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.37× | 1.81× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.69× | -1.25× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.12× | -1.98× |
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
APTV
| Electrical Distribution Systems | $2.3B | 45% |
| Engineered Components Group | $1.4B | 28% |
| Active Safety | $716.0M | 14% |
| User Experience And Other | $564.0M | 11% |
| Smart Vehicle Compute And Software | $154.0M | 3% |
OSK
| Vocational Segment | $922.4M | 34% |
| Aerial Works Platforms | $548.6M | 20% |
| Other Access Equipment | $311.8M | 12% |
| Telehandlers | $311.2M | 12% |
| Airport Products | $252.7M | 9% |
| Delivery Vehicles | $165.0M | 6% |
| Other Vocational | $130.7M | 5% |
| Transferred Over Time | $23.5M | 1% |
