vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ALLIANCE RESOURCE PARTNERS LP (ARLP) and PEABODY ENERGY CORP (BTU). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
PEABODY ENERGY CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.0B vs $535.5M, roughly 1.9× ALLIANCE RESOURCE PARTNERS LP). ALLIANCE RESOURCE PARTNERS LP runs the higher net margin — 15.4% vs 1.2%, a 14.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, PEABODY ENERGY CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-9.0% vs -9.2%). Over the past eight quarters, PEABODY ENERGY CORP's revenue compounded faster (1.9% CAGR vs -9.4%).
Alliance Resource Partners LP is a leading North American natural resource enterprise primarily engaged in the production and marketing of coal for utility and industrial customers. It also operates complementary business segments including mineral royalty management, oil and gas extraction, and logistics support services.
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.
ARLP vs BTU — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $535.5M | $1.0B |
| Net Profit | $82.7M | $12.4M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 18.2% | 0.8% |
| Net Margin | 15.4% | 1.2% |
| Revenue YoY | -9.2% | -9.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 406.2% | -67.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $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 | $535.5M | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $571.4M | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $547.5M | $890.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $540.5M | $937.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $590.1M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $613.6M | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $593.4M | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $651.7M | $983.6M |
| Q4 25 | $82.7M | $12.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $95.1M | $-70.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $59.4M | $-27.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $74.0M | $34.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.3M | $37.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $86.3M | $101.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $100.2M | $199.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $158.1M | $39.6M |
| Q4 25 | 18.2% | 0.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.4% | -8.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 16.2% | -4.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 17.4% | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.6% | 3.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.5% | 11.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.8% | 22.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 24.6% | 5.2% |
| Q4 25 | 15.4% | 1.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.6% | -6.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.9% | -3.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.7% | 3.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.8% | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.1% | 9.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.9% | 19.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 24.3% | 4.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.11 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.58 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.23 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.27 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.25 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.74 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $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 | $71.2M | $575.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $321.2M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $3.5B |
| Total Assets | $2.9B | $5.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.09× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $71.2M | $575.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $94.5M | $603.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $55.0M | $585.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $81.3M | $696.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $137.0M | $700.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $195.4M | $772.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $203.7M | $621.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $134.0M | $855.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | $321.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $321.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $329.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $331.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $332.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $323.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $323.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $323.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $3.5B |
| Q4 25 | $2.9B | $5.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9B | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.9B | $5.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.9B | $5.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.9B | $6.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.0B | $5.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.1B | $5.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.0B | $5.7B |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.09× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.09× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.09× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.09× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.09× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.09× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 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 | $143.9M | $68.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $99.1M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 18.5% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 8.4% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.74× | 5.53× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $387.9M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $143.9M | $68.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $209.9M | $122.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $151.7M | $23.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $145.7M | $119.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $168.4M | $119.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $209.3M | $359.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $215.8M | $7.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $209.7M | $119.0M |
| Q4 25 | $99.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $145.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $84.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $58.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $75.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $99.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $114.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $85.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | 18.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | 8.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 16.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 17.1% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 19.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.74× | 5.53× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.21× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.55× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.97× | 3.49× | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.31× | 3.17× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.43× | 3.55× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.15× | 0.04× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.33× | 3.01× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ARLP
| Illinois Basin Segment | $339.0M | 63% |
| Appalachia Segment | $141.4M | 26% |
| Other | $24.2M | 5% |
| Royalties Coal Segment | $22.4M | 4% |
| Shipping And Handling | $10.2M | 2% |
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% |
