Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Lumentum, KLA and NetApp are all benefiting from AI-related demand, but their potential paths to higher margins are not alike. Lumentum’s recent expansion coincided with rapid revenue growth; KLA sells process-control tools needed as chip designs grow more complex; and NetApp’s results highlight both strong all-flash demand and the need to distinguish product margins from consolidated margins.
The figures below cover different fiscal periods and margin definitions, so they are not a direct ranking. Actual results are separated from company guidance, and each company’s exposure is considered alongside its growth driver.
How the three margin paths differ
| Company | Path to margin improvement | Reported result and period | Key exposure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lumentum | Rapid optical-demand growth and factory activity may support higher utilization. | Q4 FY2026 non-GAAP operating margin: 36.6% (company-reported actual). | Lower demand or volume could weaken the growth and utilization pathway. |
| KLA | Process-control equipment demand tied to increasingly complex chip designs and advanced packaging. | Q1 FY2027 non-GAAP gross-margin guidance: 62.5% ± 1.0%; this is a forecast, not a Q4 actual. | Customer investment cycles and changes in semiconductor demand. |
| NetApp | Growth in all-flash storage, with product pricing and memory input costs relevant to product economics. | Q1 FY2027 consolidated gross margin: 70.6% non-GAAP; product gross margin: 54.6% non-GAAP. | Input-cost changes and product-level margin pressure. |
Margin percentages have different scopes: Lumentum’s figure is operating margin, KLA’s is forecast gross margin, and NetApp’s two figures distinguish consolidated from product gross margin. They should not be read as an apples-to-apples comparison of profitability.
Lumentum: rapid growth can lift operating leverage
Lumentum reported Q4 FY2026 revenue of $1.0063 billion, up 109.3% year over year, for the quarter ended June 27, 2026. GAAP gross margin was 47.4% and GAAP operating margin was 27.8%; on a non-GAAP basis, gross margin was 50.4% and operating margin was 36.6%. A year earlier, non-GAAP operating margin was 15.0%, a year-over-year increase of 21.6 percentage points. Fiscal-year 2026 revenue reached $3.014 billion, up 83.2% from FY2025. Lumentum’s FY2026 results report these figures.
#1 Best Overall
The likely mechanism is operating leverage: when demand rises quickly, more output can spread fixed manufacturing and operating costs across greater sales. The source article associates Lumentum’s margin gains with optical demand and factory activity. That is a plausible interpretation of the reported growth, but the company’s release does not establish factory utilization as the sole cause.
What management expects next
Lumentum’s Q1 FY2027 outlook is company guidance, not a reported result: revenue of $1.225 billion to $1.275 billion and non-GAAP operating margin of 39.5%–40.5%. The release presents this as its forecast for the coming quarter. If realized, the range would extend the recent margin level, but guidance is not a guarantee; weaker demand or lower production volume could challenge the growth-and-utilization thesis.
KLA: complexity makes process control more important
KLA’s route is less about a sudden surge in its own manufacturing volume and more about its position in semiconductor production. As leading-edge foundry and logic designs become more complex, memory specifications rise, and advanced packaging expands, manufacturers need process-control capabilities to detect and manage defects and variation. KLA’s FY2026 results link those trends to demand for its tools. The company reported Q4 FY2026 revenue of $3.658 billion and full-year revenue of $13.58 billion. Its fiscal year ended June 30, 2026. KLA’s FY2026 release describes the demand context.
CEO Rick Wallace said, “KLA remains uniquely positioned on the critical path of AI infrastructure expansion, where the increasing number and sophistication of leading-edge designs across foundry/logic and the rising complexity and performance specifications in memory are driving greater demand for process control.” The source article characterizes this positioning as a “moat”; that is an analytical description of KLA’s competitive position, not a separately measured financial result.
Keep the forecast separate from historical results
For the quarter ending September 30, 2026, KLA guided to gross margin of 61.6% ± 1.0% GAAP and 62.5% ± 1.0% non-GAAP. These are Q1 FY2027 estimates, not Q4 FY2026 reported margins. KLA notes that its non-GAAP measures exclude certain gains, costs and expenses. The company’s release provides the guidance and definitions.
KLA’s pathway depends on customers continuing to invest in semiconductor capacity and process control. A pause or shift in customer investment could slow the demand that supports the thesis, even if chip designs remain technically demanding.
Rank #4
NetApp: strong flash demand, but margin scope matters
NetApp reported Q1 FY2027 revenue of $2.025 billion, up 30% year over year, for the quarter ended July 31, 2026. GAAP operating margin was 23.9% and non-GAAP operating margin was 31.9%. All-flash array revenue was $1.309 billion, up 47% year over year. NetApp’s September 2, 2026 results release reports these figures.
Consolidated gross margin is not product gross margin
NetApp’s consolidated gross margin was 70.1% GAAP and 70.6% non-GAAP. Separately, its product gross margin was 54.4% GAAP and 54.6% non-GAAP. Product gross margin covers a narrower part of the business; it must not be presented as NetApp’s consolidated gross margin. The company’s results release lists the two scopes separately.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Best Value
The source article raises NAND costs as a possible pressure on product economics. The reported product margin makes that exposure relevant, but the cited quarterly release does not establish NAND prices as the cause of a specific margin change. The practical question is whether all-flash growth and product economics can hold up if memory input costs move or pricing changes.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What to watch when assessing durability
For these companies, “higher margins” is not one shared outcome. Track the mechanism and the exact measure rather than comparing headline percentages without context.
- Lumentum: compare subsequent revenue and non-GAAP operating-margin results with the Q1 FY2027 guidance range; growth can help utilization, but guidance remains an estimate.
- KLA: watch actual gross margin against its GAAP and non-GAAP guidance, while considering customer spending on process-control equipment and advanced manufacturing.
- NetApp: follow all-flash revenue alongside both product and consolidated gross margins; a change in one scope does not automatically describe the other.
The clearest distinction is the source of potential leverage: volume and utilization at Lumentum, process-control demand at KLA, and flash growth paired with product-cost and pricing considerations at NetApp. Each pathway has a different vulnerability, and none of the reported figures alone proves that margin gains will persist.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
