vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) and NetApp (NTAP), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Hewlett Packard Enterprise is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($9.7B vs $1.7B, roughly 5.7× NetApp). NetApp runs the higher net margin — 1.8% vs 17.9%, a 16.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Hewlett Packard Enterprise posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (14.4% vs 2.8%). Hewlett Packard Enterprise produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.8B vs $78.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Hewlett Packard Enterprise's revenue compounded faster (19.7% CAGR vs 3.0%).
The Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (HPE) is an American multinational information technology company based in Spring, Texas. It is a business-focused organization which works in servers, storage, networking, containerization software and consulting and support. HPE was ranked No. 107 in the 2018 Fortune 500 list of the largest United States corporations by total revenue.
NetApp, Inc. is an American data infrastructure company that provides unified data storage, integrated data services, and cloud operations (CloudOps) solutions to enterprise customers. The company is based in San Jose, California. It has ranked in the Fortune 500 from 2012 to 2021. Founded in 1992 with an initial public offering in 1995, NetApp offers cloud data services for management of applications and data both online and physically.
HPE vs NTAP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q2 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $9.7B | $1.7B |
| Net Profit | $175.0M | $305.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | 72.0% |
| Operating Margin | -0.1% | 23.4% |
| Net Margin | 1.8% | 17.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 14.4% | 2.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -87.2% | 2.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.13 | $1.51 |
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 | $9.7B | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.1B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.6B | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.9B | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.5B | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.7B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.2B | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.8B | $1.6B |
| Q4 25 | $175.0M | $305.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $305.0M | $233.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.1B | $340.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $627.0M | $299.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $299.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $512.0M | $248.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $314.0M | $291.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $387.0M | $313.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 72.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 70.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 68.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 69.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 71.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 71.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 70.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 71.7% |
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | 23.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.7% | 19.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -14.5% | 20.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.5% | 22.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.2% | 20.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.1% | 18.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.9% | 21.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.8% | 22.8% |
| Q4 25 | 1.8% | 17.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.3% | 14.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -13.8% | 19.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.0% | 18.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.2% | 18.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.6% | 16.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.4% | 17.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.7% | 19.5% |
| Q4 25 | $0.13 | $1.51 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.21 | $1.15 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.82 | $1.64 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.44 | $1.44 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.02 | $1.42 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.38 | $1.17 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.24 | $1.36 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.29 | $1.48 |
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 | $5.8B | $3.0B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $17.8B | $2.5B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $24.7B | $986.0M |
| Total Assets | $75.9B | $9.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.72× | 2.52× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $5.8B | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.6B | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $11.7B | $3.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.4B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.8B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6B | $3.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.7B | $3.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.8B | $2.9B |
| Q4 25 | $17.8B | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.9B | $2.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.4B | $3.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.3B | $2.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.5B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.9B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.5B | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.8B | $2.4B |
| Q4 25 | $24.7B | $986.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $24.4B | $975.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.9B | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $25.2B | $995.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $24.8B | $892.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $22.1B | $929.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $21.7B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $21.4B | $994.0M |
| Q4 25 | $75.9B | $9.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $77.3B | $9.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $67.9B | $10.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $70.3B | $9.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $71.3B | $9.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $60.9B | $9.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $59.7B | $9.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $58.6B | $9.4B |
| Q4 25 | 0.72× | 2.52× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.69× | 2.55× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.52× | 3.11× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.53× | 2.00× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.54× | 2.23× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.36× | 2.58× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.35× | 2.09× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.37× | 2.41× |
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 | $2.5B | $127.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.8B | $78.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 18.8% | 4.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 6.6% | 2.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 14.09× | 0.42× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $627.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $2.5B | $127.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $673.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-461.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-390.0M | $385.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.0B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $341.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $613.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $64.0M | $484.0M |
| Q4 25 | $1.8B | $78.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $729.0M | $620.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.0B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-918.0M | $338.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $611.0M | $300.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $533.0M | $567.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-592.0M | $448.0M |
| Q4 25 | 18.8% | 4.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.0% | 39.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -13.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -11.7% | 20.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.9% | 19.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.4% | 34.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -8.8% | 27.9% |
| Q4 25 | 6.6% | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.3% | 3.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.7% | 2.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.0% | 2.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.8% | 2.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 9.7% | 2.2% |
| Q4 25 | 14.09× | 0.42× | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.28× | 2.89× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.62× | 1.29× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.49× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.25× | 1.38× | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.48× | 2.11× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.17× | 1.55× |
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
HPE
| Products | $6.2B | 64% |
| Services | $3.3B | 34% |
| Other | $199.0M | 2% |
NTAP
| Products | $788.0M | 46% |
| Support | $647.0M | 38% |
| Public Cloud Segment | $171.0M | 10% |
| Professional And Other Services | $99.0M | 6% |
