vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Envista Holdings Corp (NVST) and Oscar Health, Inc. (OSCR), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Envista Holdings Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($750.6M vs $9.0M, roughly 83.7× Oscar Health, Inc.). Envista Holdings Corp runs the higher net margin — 4.4% vs -3933.2%, a 3937.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Oscar Health, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (86.3% vs 15.0%). Oscar Health, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($662.8M vs $91.7M). Over the past eight quarters, Oscar Health, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (26.1% CAGR vs 9.7%).
Envista Forensics is a United States based company that provides forensic engineering and recovery solutions for the insurance, legal, and risk management industries in the United States and internationally. Originally LWG Consulting, Inc., The company rebranded itself as Envista Forensics in 2017.
Oscar Health, Inc. is an American for-profit health insurance company, founded in 2012 by Joshua Kushner, Kevin Nazemi and Mario Schlosser, and is headquartered in New York City. The company focuses on the health insurance industry through telemedicine, healthcare focused technological interfaces, and transparent claims pricing systems which would make it easier for patients to navigate.
NVST vs OSCR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $750.6M | $9.0M |
| Net Profit | $32.9M | $-352.6M |
| Gross Margin | 54.7% | — |
| Operating Margin | 9.8% | -3722.8% |
| Net Margin | 4.4% | -3933.2% |
| Revenue YoY | 15.0% | 86.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 2641.7% | -129.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.20 | $-1.19 |
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 | $750.6M | $9.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $669.9M | $8.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $682.1M | $6.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $616.9M | $4.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $652.9M | $4.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $601.0M | $4.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $633.1M | $5.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $623.6M | $5.6M |
| Q4 25 | $32.9M | $-352.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-30.3M | $-137.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $26.4M | $-228.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $18.0M | $275.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2M | $-153.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.2M | $-54.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.2B | $56.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $23.6M | $177.4M |
| Q4 25 | 54.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 55.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 54.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 54.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 57.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 52.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 51.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 57.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | 9.8% | -3722.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.6% | -1468.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.8% | -3547.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.1% | -3070.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.5% | -987.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | -182.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | 4.4% | -3933.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -4.5% | -1561.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.9% | -3514.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.9% | 6357.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.2% | -3190.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.4% | -1114.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | -181.9% | 1074.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.8% | 3148.2% |
| Q4 25 | $0.20 | $-1.19 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.18 | $-0.53 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.16 | $-0.89 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.10 | $0.92 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.00 | $-0.50 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.05 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-6.69 | $0.20 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.14 | $0.62 |
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 | $1.2B | $2.8B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.4B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.1B | $977.6M |
| Total Assets | $5.7B | $6.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.47× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $991.3M | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0B | $2.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $948.5M | $2.2B |
| Q4 25 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.5B | — |
| Q4 25 | $3.1B | $977.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.1B | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.0B | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.9B | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.0B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.1B | $1.0B |
| Q4 25 | $5.7B | $6.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.6B | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.7B | $6.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.5B | $5.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.4B | $4.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.5B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.4B | $5.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.6B | $4.4B |
| Q4 25 | 0.47× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.47× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.46× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.47× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.48× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.46× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.51× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.36× | — |
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 | $108.0M | $671.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $91.7M | $662.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 12.2% | 7393.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 2.2% | 101.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 3.28× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $230.4M | $1.1B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $108.0M | $671.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $78.7M | $-964.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $88.7M | $509.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $300.0K | $878.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $132.4M | $346.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $70.7M | $-500.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $93.1M | $497.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $40.3M | $634.4M |
| Q4 25 | $91.7M | $662.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $67.9M | $-973.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $76.4M | $499.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-5.6M | $869.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $123.8M | $340.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $63.3M | $-507.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $86.3M | $489.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $29.3M | $628.4M |
| Q4 25 | 12.2% | 7393.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.1% | -11063.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.2% | 7692.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.9% | 20081.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.0% | 7065.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.5% | -10363.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.6% | 9359.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.7% | 11153.9% |
| Q4 25 | 2.2% | 101.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.6% | 102.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.8% | 142.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.0% | 208.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.3% | 141.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.2% | 154.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.1% | 144.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.8% | 105.6% |
| Q4 25 | 3.28× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.36× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.02× | 3.19× | ||
| Q4 24 | 110.33× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.62× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 8.85× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.71× | 3.58× |
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
NVST
| Other | $375.8M | 50% |
| Specialty Productsand Technologies | $188.4M | 25% |
| Equipmentand Consumables | $186.4M | 25% |
OSCR
Segment breakdown not available.
