vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of BARRICK MINING CORP (B) and Caledonia Mining Corp Plc (CMCL), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
BARRICK MINING CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.7B vs $46.9M, roughly 78.5× Caledonia Mining Corp Plc). BARRICK MINING CORP runs the higher net margin — 34.1% vs 7.0%, a 27.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, BARRICK MINING CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (16.4% vs 13.8%).
Barrick Mining Corporation is a mining company that produces gold and copper. It has mining operations and projects in Argentina, Canada, Chile, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Jamaica, Mali, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Tanzania, the United States and Zambia. In 2024, it produced 3.91 million ounces of gold at all-in sustaining costs of $1,484/ounce and 195,000 tonnes of copper at all-in sustaining costs of $3.45/pound. As of ...
Hochschild Mining plc is a leading British-based silver and gold mining business operating in North, Central, and South America. It is headquartered in Lima, Peru, with a corporate office in London, is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 250 Index. The main shareholder is the Peruvian businessman Eduardo Hochschild.
B vs CMCL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 2025 vs Q3 2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.7B | $46.9M |
| Net Profit | $1.3B | $3.3M |
| Gross Margin | 49.0% | 41.2% |
| Operating Margin | 38.5% | 18.6% |
| Net Margin | 34.1% | 7.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 16.4% | 13.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 98.1% | -33.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.47 | $0.13 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q2 25 | $3.7B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $46.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.2B | $50.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $38.5M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $38.7M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $41.2M | ||
| Q2 23 | $2.8B | $37.0M | ||
| Q1 23 | — | $29.4M |
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $3.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $634.0M | $10.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.1M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-2.6M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $4.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | $502.0M | $-2.5M | ||
| Q1 23 | — | $-4.6M |
| Q2 25 | 49.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 41.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 37.4% | 45.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 35.9% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | 27.3% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | 34.3% | ||
| Q2 23 | 31.6% | 29.5% | ||
| Q1 23 | — | 19.9% |
| Q2 25 | 38.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 18.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.5% | 32.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 13.8% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | 6.0% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | 22.4% | ||
| Q2 23 | 28.6% | 2.5% | ||
| Q1 23 | — | -5.1% |
| Q2 25 | 34.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 20.1% | 20.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 5.4% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -6.7% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | 12.0% | ||
| Q2 23 | 17.7% | -6.8% | ||
| Q1 23 | — | -15.8% |
| Q2 25 | $0.47 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.13 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.21 | $0.42 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.07 | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-0.19 | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $0.21 | ||
| Q2 23 | $0.17 | $-0.14 | ||
| Q1 23 | — | $-0.32 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $4.8B | $7.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $33.4B | $231.0M |
| Total Assets | $47.3B | $339.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q2 25 | $4.8B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $7.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.0B | $15.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.8M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $6.7M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $10.8M | ||
| Q2 23 | $4.2B | $12.8M | ||
| Q1 23 | — | $19.0M |
| Q2 25 | $33.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $231.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $32.5B | $231.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $220.3M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $224.2M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $226.6M | ||
| Q2 23 | $31.5B | $224.3M | ||
| Q1 23 | — | $223.4M |
| Q2 25 | $47.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $339.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $46.2B | $338.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $321.8M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $328.3M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $320.3M | ||
| Q2 23 | $45.3B | $313.9M | ||
| Q1 23 | — | $320.0M |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $1.3B | $4.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.06× | 1.40× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $4.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | $19.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $14.5M | ||
| Q2 23 | $832.0M | $-2.2M | ||
| Q1 23 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | 1.06× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.83× | 1.87× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | 2.94× | ||
| Q2 23 | 1.66× | — | ||
| Q1 23 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
