vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Ardent Health, Inc. (ARDT) and PEABODY ENERGY CORP (BTU). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Ardent Health, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.6B vs $1.0B, roughly 1.6× PEABODY ENERGY CORP). Ardent Health, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 2.8% vs 1.2%, a 1.6% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Goodlife Health Clubs is a chain of health clubs, with more than 80 locations in Australia.
Peabody Energy is an American coal mining company headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri. Its primary business consists of the mining, sale, and distribution of coal, which is purchased for use in electricity generation and steelmaking. Peabody also markets, brokers, and trades coal through offices in China, Australia, and the United States.
ARDT vs BTU — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.6B | $1.0B |
| Net Profit | $45.0M | $12.4M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 5.8% | 0.8% |
| Net Margin | 2.8% | 1.2% |
| Revenue YoY | — | -9.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -67.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.32 | $0.11 |
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 | $1.6B | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.6B | $890.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.5B | $937.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $983.6M |
| Q4 25 | $45.0M | $12.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-23.5M | $-70.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $73.0M | $-27.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $41.4M | $34.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $37.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $26.3M | $101.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $42.8M | $199.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $39.6M |
| Q4 25 | 5.8% | 0.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -0.1% | -8.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.4% | -4.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.0% | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.9% | 11.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.6% | 22.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 5.2% |
| Q4 25 | 2.8% | 1.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.5% | -6.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.4% | -3.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.8% | 3.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.8% | 9.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.9% | 19.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 4.0% |
| Q4 25 | $0.32 | $0.11 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.17 | $-0.58 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.52 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.29 | $0.27 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.25 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.19 | $0.74 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.34 | $1.42 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.29 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $709.6M | $575.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.1B | $321.2M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.3B | $3.5B |
| Total Assets | $5.3B | $5.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.84× | 0.09× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $709.6M | $575.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $609.4M | $603.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $540.6M | $585.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $495.0M | $696.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $700.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $563.1M | $772.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $334.5M | $621.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $855.7M |
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $321.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $321.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $329.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $331.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $332.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $323.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $323.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $323.3M |
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $3.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $3.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | $3.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $739.9M | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $3.5B |
| Q4 25 | $5.3B | $5.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.2B | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.0B | $5.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.9B | $5.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $6.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.8B | $5.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.6B | $5.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $5.7B |
| Q4 25 | 0.84× | 0.09× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.88× | 0.09× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.87× | 0.09× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.93× | 0.09× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.09× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.08× | 0.09× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.46× | 0.09× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.09× |
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 | $223.4M | $68.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 4.97× | 5.53× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $223.4M | $68.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $154.4M | $122.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $117.5M | $23.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-24.8M | $119.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $119.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $89.7M | $359.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $7.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $119.0M |
| Q4 25 | 4.97× | 5.53× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.61× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.60× | 3.49× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.17× | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.41× | 3.55× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.04× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 3.01× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ARDT
Segment breakdown not available.
BTU
| Seaborne Metallurgical Mining | $305.4M | 30% |
| Powder River Basin Mining | $300.3M | 29% |
| Seaborne Thermal Mining | $205.6M | 20% |
| Other | $182.1M | 18% |
| Thermal Coal | $28.9M | 3% |
