vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Mission Produce, Inc. (AVO) and Howard Hughes Holdings Inc. (HHH). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Howard Hughes Holdings Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($624.4M vs $319.0M, roughly 2.0× Mission Produce, Inc.). Mission Produce, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 5.0% vs 1.0%, a 4.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Mission Produce, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-10.0% vs -33.2%). Howard Hughes Holdings Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($348.6M vs $55.6M). Over the past eight quarters, Howard Hughes Holdings Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (91.0% CAGR vs 11.0%).
Mission Produce, Inc.AVOEarnings & Financial Report
Produce Co., Ltd. was a Japanese video game company. Founded on April 6, 1990 by former Irem employees, it developed a number of games for both Enix and Hudson Soft. Produce! have created games for arcades and for the Super Nintendo Entertainment System, Nintendo 64, PlayStation, and PC Engine systems.
Howard Hughes Holdings Inc., formerly the Howard Hughes Corporation, is a real estate development and management company based in The Woodlands, Texas. It was formed in 2010 as a spin-off from General Growth Properties (GGP). Most of its holdings are focused on several master-planned communities. It took its name from the original Howard Hughes Corporation, which had developed the planned community of Summerlin, Nevada, and later became a subsidiary of GGP.
AVO vs HHH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $319.0M | $624.4M |
| Net Profit | $16.0M | $6.0M |
| Gross Margin | 17.5% | — |
| Operating Margin | 8.8% | 4.2% |
| Net Margin | 5.0% | 1.0% |
| Revenue YoY | -10.0% | -33.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -7.5% | -96.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.23 | $0.20 |
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 | $319.0M | $624.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $357.7M | $390.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $380.3M | $260.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $334.2M | $199.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $354.4M | $935.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $324.0M | $327.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $297.6M | $317.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $258.7M | $171.1M |
| Q4 25 | $16.0M | $6.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.7M | $119.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.1M | $-12.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.9M | $10.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.3M | $156.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.4M | $72.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.0M | $21.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $0 | $-52.5M |
| Q4 25 | 17.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 11.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | 8.8% | 4.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.9% | 48.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.8% | 26.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.8% | 24.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.1% | 33.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.2% | 60.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.1% | 20.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.1% | -9.8% |
| Q4 25 | 5.0% | 1.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.1% | 30.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | -4.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | 5.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.9% | 16.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.8% | 22.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.4% | 6.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -30.7% |
| Q4 25 | $0.23 | $0.20 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.21 | $2.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.04 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.05 | $0.21 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.25 | $3.14 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.17 | $1.46 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | $0.42 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.00 | $-1.06 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $64.8M | $1.5B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $95.8M | $5.1B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $587.3M | $3.8B |
| Total Assets | $983.0M | $10.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.16× | 1.35× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $64.8M | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $43.7M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $36.7M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $40.1M | $493.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $58.0M | $596.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $49.5M | $400.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $46.2M | $436.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $39.9M | $462.7M |
| Q4 25 | $95.8M | $5.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $131.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $147.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $117.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $113.7M | $5.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $134.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $170.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $156.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $587.3M | $3.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $568.7M | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $552.3M | $3.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $550.8M | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $547.3M | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $527.3M | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $513.3M | $3.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $505.1M | $2.9B |
| Q4 25 | $983.0M | $10.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $10.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0B | $10.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $997.8M | $9.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $971.5M | $9.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $959.9M | $9.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $966.9M | $9.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $937.5M | $9.6B |
| Q4 25 | 0.16× | 1.35× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.23× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.27× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.21× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.21× | 1.85× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.25× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.33× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.31× | — |
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 | $67.2M | $360.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $55.6M | $348.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 17.4% | 55.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 3.6% | 1.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 4.20× | 60.04× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $37.2M | $417.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $67.2M | $360.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $34.4M | $149.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-11.8M | $177.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.2M | $-224.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $38.0M | $337.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $42.5M | $248.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.4M | $-17.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.5M | $-171.2M |
| Q4 25 | $55.6M | $348.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.6M | $137.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-25.0M | $169.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-16.0M | $-238.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $31.1M | $317.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $34.9M | $238.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-4.4M | $-25.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-400.0K | $-182.0M |
| Q4 25 | 17.4% | 55.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.3% | 35.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.6% | 65.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.8% | -119.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.8% | 33.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.8% | 73.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.5% | -7.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.2% | -106.4% |
| Q4 25 | 3.6% | 1.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.3% | 3.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.5% | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.4% | 6.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.9% | 2.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.3% | 2.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.6% | 2.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.8% | 6.3% |
| Q4 25 | 4.20× | 60.04× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.34× | 1.25× | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.81× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.31× | -21.35× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.20× | 2.16× | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.43× | 3.41× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.49× | -0.83× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AVO
| Avocado | $256.9M | 81% |
| Blueberry | $36.5M | 11% |
| Mango | $18.7M | 6% |
| Other | $6.9M | 2% |
HHH
| Transferred At Point In Time | $499.8M | 80% |
| Operating Assets Segment | $117.9M | 19% |
| Builder Price Participation | $12.9M | 2% |
