vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. (AMR) and Rackspace Technology, Inc. (RXT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Rackspace Technology, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($682.8M vs $519.1M, roughly 1.3× Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc.). Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -3.3% vs -4.8%, a 1.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Rackspace Technology, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-0.4% vs -15.7%). Rackspace Technology, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($56.0M vs $-10.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Rackspace Technology, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (-0.6% CAGR vs -22.4%).
Alpha Metallurgical Resources, formerly Contura Energy, is a leading coal supplier with underground and surface coal mining complexes across Northern and Central Appalachia. Contura owns large coal basins in Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia which supply both metallurgical coal to produce steel and thermal coal to generate power.
Rackspace Technology, Inc. is an American cloud computing company based in San Antonio, Texas. It also has offices in Reston, Virginia, as well as in Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, India, Dubai, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Singapore, Mexico, Toronto and Hong Kong. Its data centers are located in Amsterdam (Netherlands), Virginia (USA), Chicago (USA), Dallas (USA), London (UK), Frankfurt (Germany), Hong Kong (China), Kansas City (USA), New York City (USA), San Jose (USA), Shangh...
AMR vs RXT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $519.1M | $682.8M |
| Net Profit | $-17.3M | $-32.7M |
| Gross Margin | — | 17.6% |
| Operating Margin | -4.1% | -0.5% |
| Net Margin | -3.3% | -4.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -15.7% | -0.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | -711.2% | 41.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-1.35 | $-0.13 |
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 | $519.1M | $682.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $525.2M | $671.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $548.7M | $666.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $529.7M | $665.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $615.4M | $685.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $669.8M | $675.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $800.1M | $684.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $861.3M | $690.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-17.3M | $-32.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-5.5M | $-67.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-5.0M | $-54.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-33.9M | $-71.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-2.1M | $-56.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.8M | $-186.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $58.9M | $25.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $127.0M | $-640.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | 17.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 19.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 19.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 19.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 19.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 19.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 19.2% |
| Q4 25 | -4.1% | -0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -0.5% | -5.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.5% | -3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.6% | -5.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.6% | -4.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.8% | -25.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.8% | -7.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 16.5% | -94.5% |
| Q4 25 | -3.3% | -4.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.1% | -10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.9% | -8.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.4% | -10.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.3% | -8.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.6% | -27.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.4% | 3.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 14.7% | -92.7% |
| Q4 25 | $-1.35 | $-0.13 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.42 | $-0.28 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.38 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.60 | $-0.31 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.09 | $-0.20 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.29 | $-0.82 | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.49 | $0.11 | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.59 | $-2.91 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $415.6M | $105.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $9.8M | $2.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.5B | $-1.2B |
| Total Assets | $2.3B | $2.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.01× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $415.6M | $105.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $457.9M | $99.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $449.0M | $103.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $448.0M | $128.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $481.6M | $144.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $484.6M | $157.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $336.1M | $190.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $269.4M | $282.6M |
| Q4 25 | $9.8M | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.1M | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4M | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.9M | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.3M | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.0M | $3.0B |
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $-1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $-1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.6B | $-1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | $-1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $-1.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.7B | $-949.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6B | $-756.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.6B | $-787.2M |
| Q4 25 | $2.3B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.3B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.4B | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.4B | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.5B | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.5B | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.5B | $3.5B |
| Q4 25 | 0.01× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.00× | — |
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 | $19.0M | $59.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-10.0M | $56.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -1.9% | 8.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.6% | 0.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $17.8M | $90.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $19.0M | $59.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $50.5M | $70.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $53.2M | $8.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $22.2M | $12.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $56.3M | $54.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $189.5M | $51.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $138.1M | $24.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $196.1M | $-90.3M |
| Q4 25 | $-10.0M | $56.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $25.4M | $42.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.6M | $-12.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-16.3M | $4.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.6M | $34.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $158.0M | $27.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $77.0M | $-14.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $132.5M | $-118.4M |
| Q4 25 | -1.9% | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.8% | 6.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.4% | -1.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -3.1% | 0.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.2% | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.6% | 4.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.6% | -2.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.4% | -17.1% |
| Q4 25 | 5.6% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.8% | 4.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.3% | 3.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.3% | 1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.9% | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.7% | 3.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.6% | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.4% | 4.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 49.81× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.34× | 0.96× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.54× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AMR
Segment breakdown not available.
RXT
| Public Cloud Services Segment | $442.2M | 65% |
| Private Cloud Service Segment | $240.6M | 35% |
