vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Aflac (AFL) and MESABI TRUST (MSB). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Aflac is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.9B vs $3.6M, roughly 1355.3× MESABI TRUST). MESABI TRUST runs the higher net margin — 77.1% vs 28.3%, a 48.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Aflac posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-10.0% vs -95.5%). Over the past eight quarters, Aflac's revenue compounded faster (-5.4% CAGR vs -24.1%).
Aflac Incorporated is an American insurance company and is the largest provider of supplemental insurance in the United States. It was founded in 1955 and is based in Columbus, Georgia. In the U.S., it underwrites a wide range of insurance policies, but is perhaps more known for its payroll deduction insurance coverage, which pays cash benefits when a policyholder has a covered accident or illness. The company states it "provides financial protection to more than 50 million people worldwide".
Mesabi Trust is a United States-based royalty trust that holds permanent royalty interests in iron ore mining properties located in Minnesota's Mesabi Range. It earns revenue primarily from royalty payments tied to the production and sale of iron ore products, with core earnings sourced from active mining partners operating on the land it holds interests in, catering to the global steel manufacturing market.
AFL vs MSB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q3 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.9B | $3.6M |
| Net Profit | $1.4B | $2.8M |
| Gross Margin | — | 77.1% |
| Operating Margin | 32.3% | — |
| Net Margin | 28.3% | 77.1% |
| Revenue YoY | -10.0% | -95.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | -27.5% | -96.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $2.58 | — |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $4.9B | $3.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.7B | $5.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2B | $4.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.4B | $6.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.4B | $79.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.9B | $6.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.1B | $6.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.4B | $6.2M |
| Q4 25 | $1.4B | $2.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $4.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $599.0M | $3.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $29.0M | $6.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | $78.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-93.0M | $5.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8B | $3.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.9B | $4.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | 77.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 84.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 76.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 88.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 99.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 83.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 55.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 75.3% |
| Q4 25 | 32.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 42.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 39.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 39.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | 28.3% | 77.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.6% | 84.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.4% | 76.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.9% | 88.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 35.2% | 99.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | -3.2% | 83.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.2% | 55.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 34.6% | 75.3% |
| Q4 25 | $2.58 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.08 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.11 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.05 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.45 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.17 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.10 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.25 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $6.2B | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $29.5B | $21.1M |
| Total Assets | $116.5B | $26.0M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $6.2B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.8B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.0B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.2B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.2B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.6B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.1B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.1B | — |
| Q4 25 | $29.5B | $21.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $28.7B | $22.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $27.2B | $19.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $26.3B | $23.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $26.1B | $95.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $24.8B | $22.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $26.0B | $20.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $23.5B | $21.0M |
| Q4 25 | $116.5B | $26.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $122.3B | $24.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $124.7B | $27.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $120.3B | $101.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $117.6B | $100.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $128.4B | $26.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $120.2B | $25.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $124.7B | $26.7M |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $315.0M | $3.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.23× | 1.27× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $315.0M | $3.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $4.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $399.0M | $2.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $589.0M | $9.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $333.0M | $78.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $3.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $255.0M | $2.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $849.0M | $5.7M |
| Q4 25 | 0.23× | 1.27× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.76× | 0.92× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.67× | 0.57× | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.31× | 1.55× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.18× | 1.00× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.71× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.15× | 0.72× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.45× | 1.21× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AFL
| Aflac Japan | $2.3B | 47% |
| Aflac US | $1.7B | 35% |
| Other | $862.0M | 18% |
MSB
Segment breakdown not available.
