vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of C.H. Robinson (CHRW) and United Parcel Service (UPS), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
United Parcel Service is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($24.5B vs $3.9B, roughly 6.3× C.H. Robinson). United Parcel Service runs the higher net margin — 3.5% vs 7.3%, a 3.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, United Parcel Service posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-3.2% vs -6.5%). United Parcel Service produced more free cash flow last quarter ($2.6B vs $302.4M). Over the past eight quarters, United Parcel Service's revenue compounded faster (6.2% CAGR vs -5.8%).
C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. is an American transportation company that includes third-party logistics (3PL). The company offers freight transportation, transportation management, brokerage and warehousing. It offers truckload, less than truckload, air freight, intermodal, and ocean transportation.
United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) is an American multinational shipping & receiving and supply chain management company founded in 1907. Originally known as the American Messenger Company specializing in telegraphs, UPS has expanded to become a Fortune 500 company and one of the world's largest shipping couriers. UPS today is primarily known for its ground shipping services as well as the UPS Store, a retail chain which assists UPS shipments and provides tools for small businesses.
CHRW vs UPS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.9B | $24.5B |
| Net Profit | $136.3M | $1.8B |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 4.6% | 10.5% |
| Net Margin | 3.5% | 7.3% |
| Revenue YoY | -6.5% | -3.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -8.7% | 4.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.12 | $2.10 |
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 | $3.9B | $24.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.1B | $21.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.1B | $21.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0B | $21.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.2B | $25.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.6B | $22.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.5B | $21.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.4B | $21.7B |
| Q4 25 | $136.3M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $163.0M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $152.5M | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $135.3M | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $149.3M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $97.2M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $126.3M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $92.9M | $1.1B |
| Q4 25 | 4.6% | 10.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.3% | 8.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.2% | 8.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.4% | 7.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.4% | 11.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.9% | 8.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.0% | 8.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.9% | 7.4% |
| Q4 25 | 3.5% | 7.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.9% | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.7% | 6.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.3% | 5.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.6% | 6.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.1% | 6.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.8% | 6.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.1% | 5.1% |
| Q4 25 | $1.12 | $2.10 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.34 | $1.55 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.26 | $1.51 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.11 | $1.40 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.23 | $2.00 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.80 | $1.80 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.05 | $1.65 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.78 | $1.30 |
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 | $160.9M | $5.9B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.1B | $23.5B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.8B | $16.2B |
| Total Assets | $5.1B | $73.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.59× | 1.45× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $160.9M | $5.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $136.8M | $6.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $156.0M | $6.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $129.9M | $5.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $145.8M | $6.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $131.7M | $6.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $113.2M | $6.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $121.8M | $4.5B |
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $23.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $23.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | $23.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $19.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $19.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | $20.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6B | $20.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7B | $18.8B |
| Q4 25 | $1.8B | $16.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9B | $15.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.8B | $15.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $15.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.7B | $16.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | $16.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $17.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | $16.9B |
| Q4 25 | $5.1B | $73.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.2B | $71.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.3B | $70.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.2B | $68.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.3B | $70.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.6B | $68.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.5B | $69.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.5B | $67.6B |
| Q4 25 | 0.59× | 1.45× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.64× | 1.51× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.76× | 1.51× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.80× | 1.25× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.80× | 1.16× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.95× | 1.21× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.07× | 1.19× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.19× | 1.11× |
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 | $305.4M | $3.3B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $302.4M | $2.6B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 7.7% | 10.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 0.1% | 2.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 2.24× | 1.84× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $894.9M | $4.8B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $305.4M | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $275.4M | $2.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $227.1M | $348.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $106.5M | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $267.9M | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $108.1M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $166.4M | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $-33.3M | $3.3B |
| Q4 25 | $302.4M | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $269.5M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $219.8M | $-775.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $103.2M | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $265.3M | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $103.3M | $655.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $159.8M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $-41.9M | $2.3B |
| Q4 25 | 7.7% | 10.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.5% | 7.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.3% | -3.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.5% | 6.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.3% | 8.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.2% | 2.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.6% | 4.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.0% | 10.5% |
| Q4 25 | 0.1% | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.1% | 4.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.2% | 5.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.1% | 4.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.1% | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.1% | 3.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.1% | 4.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.2% | 4.8% |
| Q4 25 | 2.24× | 1.84× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.69× | 1.89× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.49× | 0.27× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.79× | 1.95× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.79× | 1.93× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.11× | 0.97× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.32× | 1.41× | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.36× | 2.98× |
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
CHRW
| North American Service Transportation NAST | $2.8B | 72% |
| Global Forwarding | $731.0M | 19% |
| Sourcing | $340.9M | 9% |
UPS
| Ground | $12.5B | 51% |
| Export | $3.9B | 16% |
| Next Day Air | $2.6B | 11% |
| Other | $1.5B | 6% |
| Logistic | $1.4B | 6% |
| Deferred | $1.4B | 6% |
| Forwarding | $728.0M | 3% |
