vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Birkenstock Holding plc (BIRK) and ROYAL GOLD INC (RGLD). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Birkenstock Holding plc is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($526.3M vs $375.3M, roughly 1.4× ROYAL GOLD INC). ROYAL GOLD INC runs the higher net margin — 24.9% vs 19.3%, a 5.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. Over the past eight quarters, ROYAL GOLD INC's revenue compounded faster (58.8% CAGR vs 26.8%).
Birkenstock Holding plc is a German shoe manufacturer known for its sandals and other shoes notable for contoured cork footbeds (soles), made with layers of suede and jute, which conform to the shape of their wearers' feet. Founded in 1774 by Johann Adam Birkenstock and headquartered in Neustadt (Wied), Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany, the company's original purpose was to create shoes that support and contour the foot, compared to the flat soles of many shoes during that time. In 1896, the Fus...
Royal Gold Inc. is a leading precious metals streaming and royalty firm that acquires and manages a diversified portfolio of streaming interests, royalties, and equity interests tied to mining projects. Its assets cover gold, silver, and copper production across North America, South America, Africa, and Australia, operating with a low-risk model that avoids direct mining operations.
BIRK vs RGLD — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $526.3M | $375.3M |
| Net Profit | $101.4M | $93.6M |
| Gross Margin | 62.8% | 64.6% |
| Operating Margin | 23.0% | 56.2% |
| Net Margin | 19.3% | 24.9% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 85.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -12.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $1.04 |
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 | — | $375.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $526.3M | $252.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $685.8M | $209.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $620.3M | $193.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $390.7M | $202.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $455.8M | $193.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $609.9M | $174.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $519.7M | $148.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | $93.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $101.4M | $126.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $139.6M | $132.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $113.5M | $113.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $21.7M | $107.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $96.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $80.6M | $81.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $77.4M | $47.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 64.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 62.8% | 73.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 60.5% | 72.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 57.7% | 69.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 60.3% | 70.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 66.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 59.5% | 64.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 56.3% | 58.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 56.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 23.0% | 64.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 31.2% | 67.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 30.5% | 63.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.7% | 65.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 61.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 27.5% | 58.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 27.5% | 50.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | 24.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.3% | 50.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.3% | 63.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.3% | 58.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.6% | 53.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 49.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.2% | 46.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 14.9% | 31.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.04 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.92 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.01 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.72 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.63 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.46 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.23 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.72 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $355.4M | $233.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.9B | $7.2B |
| Total Assets | $5.3B | $9.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $233.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $355.4M | $172.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $282.8M | $248.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $254.2M | $240.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $322.5M | $195.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $384.3M | $127.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $436.7M | $74.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $189.8M | $137.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $50.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $7.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9B | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8B | $3.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.0B | $3.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0B | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8B | $3.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.8B | $3.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.7B | $2.9B |
| Q4 25 | — | $9.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.3B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.3B | $3.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.4B | $3.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.4B | $3.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.3B | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.4B | $3.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.2B | $3.3B |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.00× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.02× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $415.0M | $241.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 4.09× | 2.58× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $241.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $415.0M | $174.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $152.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $136.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-12.6M | $141.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $463.0M | $136.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $113.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $138.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.58× | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.09× | 1.37× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.15× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.20× | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.58× | 1.31× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.42× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.40× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.93× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BIRK
Segment breakdown not available.
RGLD
| Gold | $216.9M | 58% |
| Pueblo Viejo | $47.3M | 13% |
| Andacollo | $32.6M | 9% |
| Silver | $32.1M | 9% |
| Other | $27.2M | 7% |
| Copper | $13.7M | 4% |
| Cortez Legacy Zone | $5.4M | 1% |
