vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ASHFORD HOSPITALITY TRUST INC (AHT) and Nine Energy Service, Inc. (NINE). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ASHFORD HOSPITALITY TRUST INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($259.0M vs $132.2M, roughly 2.0× Nine Energy Service, Inc.). Nine Energy Service, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -14.5% vs -26.8%, a 12.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, ASHFORD HOSPITALITY TRUST INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-6.0% vs -6.5%). Nine Energy Service, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-4.8M vs $-86.8M). Over the past eight quarters, Nine Energy Service, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (-3.6% CAGR vs -7.7%).
Ashford Hospitality Trust Inc is a U.S.-headquartered real estate investment trust focused on upper-upscale full-service hotel properties across key U.S. urban, suburban and resort markets. Its portfolio holds assets under top global hospitality brands, serving business and leisure travelers, with a focus on long-term value growth and stable shareholder returns.
Xcel Energy Inc. is a U.S. regulated electric utility and natural gas delivery company based in Minneapolis, Minnesota, serving approximately 3.9 million electricity customers and 2.2 million natural gas customers across parts of eight states as of mid-2025. It consists of four operating subsidiaries: Northern States Power-Minnesota, Northern States Power-Wisconsin, Public Service Company of Colorado, and Southwestern Public Service Co.
AHT vs NINE — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $259.0M | $132.2M |
| Net Profit | $-69.3M | $-19.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -2.6% | -4.2% |
| Net Margin | -26.8% | -14.5% |
| Revenue YoY | -6.0% | -6.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | 44.2% | -117.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-12.85 | $-0.47 |
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 | $259.0M | $132.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $266.1M | $132.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $302.0M | $147.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $277.4M | $150.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $275.5M | $141.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $276.6M | $138.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $316.5M | $132.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $303.9M | $142.1M |
| Q4 25 | $-69.3M | $-19.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-60.1M | $-14.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-30.4M | $-10.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-20.0M | $-7.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-124.2M | $-8.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-57.9M | $-10.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $50.3M | $-14.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $71.6M | $-8.1M |
| Q4 25 | -2.6% | -4.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.6% | -0.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 16.3% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 22.2% | 3.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -17.8% | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.3% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 42.8% | -1.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 50.2% | 3.1% |
| Q4 25 | -26.8% | -14.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -22.6% | -11.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -10.1% | -7.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.2% | -4.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -45.1% | -6.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -20.9% | -7.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.9% | -10.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 23.5% | -5.7% |
| Q4 25 | $-12.85 | $-0.47 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-11.35 | $-0.35 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.88 | $-0.25 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-4.91 | $-0.18 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-13.64 | $-0.21 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-12.39 | $-0.26 | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.50 | $-0.40 | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.99 | $-0.24 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $66.1M | $18.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $2.5B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-626.4M | $-115.0M |
| Total Assets | $2.8B | $339.5M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $66.1M | $18.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $81.9M | $14.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $100.0M | $14.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $85.8M | $17.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $112.9M | $27.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $119.7M | $15.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $121.8M | $26.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $111.1M | $10.2M |
| Q4 25 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.7B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.8B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.9B | — |
| Q4 25 | $-626.4M | $-115.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-548.7M | $-95.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-485.5M | $-81.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-446.1M | $-72.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-419.2M | $-66.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-288.4M | $-57.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-225.9M | $-49.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-276.8M | $-43.3M |
| Q4 25 | $2.8B | $339.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.0B | $340.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.1B | $361.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.1B | $359.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.2B | $360.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.3B | $353.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.3B | $381.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.5B | $380.4M |
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 | $-15.7M | $-2.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-86.8M | $-4.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -33.5% | -3.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 27.5% | 2.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-135.5M | $-23.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-15.7M | $-2.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.5M | $-9.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $16.3M | $10.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-25.0M | $-5.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-23.6M | $15.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $795.0K | $-5.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.0M | $12.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-46.5M | $-8.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-86.8M | $-4.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-226.0K | $-13.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.6M | $4.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-44.8M | $-9.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-131.6M | $11.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-21.8M | $-9.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-22.9M | $10.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-80.4M | $-14.3M |
| Q4 25 | -33.5% | -3.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -0.1% | -10.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -1.2% | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -16.2% | -6.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -47.8% | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -7.9% | -6.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -7.2% | 7.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | -26.5% | -10.1% |
| Q4 25 | 27.5% | 2.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.1% | 2.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.6% | 4.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.2% | 2.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 39.2% | 2.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.2% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.8% | 2.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 11.2% | 3.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.16× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.65× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AHT
| Occupancy | $190.2M | 73% |
| Food And Beverage | $51.8M | 20% |
| Hotel Other | $16.6M | 6% |
NINE
| Cement | $52.6M | 40% |
| Tool Revenue | $28.6M | 22% |
| Coiled Tubing | $25.8M | 20% |
| Wireline | $25.1M | 19% |
