vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Black Stone Minerals, L.P. (BSM) and CENTRAL PACIFIC FINANCIAL CORP (CPF). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Black Stone Minerals, L.P. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($95.2M vs $72.9M, roughly 1.3× CENTRAL PACIFIC FINANCIAL CORP). Black Stone Minerals, L.P. runs the higher net margin — 75.9% vs 28.4%, a 47.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, CENTRAL PACIFIC FINANCIAL CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (6.0% vs -8.7%). Over the past eight quarters, CENTRAL PACIFIC FINANCIAL CORP's revenue compounded faster (6.7% CAGR vs -9.7%).
Black Stone Minerals, L.P., or Black Stone Minerals, is a Houston, Texas-based oil and natural gas corporation.
Central Pacific Bank (CPB) is an American regional commercial bank located throughout the state of Hawaii.
BSM vs CPF — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $95.2M | $72.9M |
| Net Profit | $72.2M | $20.7M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 78.6% | — |
| Net Margin | 75.9% | 28.4% |
| Revenue YoY | -8.7% | 6.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 55.8% | 16.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.78 |
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.
| Q1 26 | — | $72.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | $95.2M | $76.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $105.2M | $74.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $106.7M | $72.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.3M | $68.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $104.3M | $58.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $103.2M | $66.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $115.2M | $64.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $20.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | $72.2M | $22.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $91.7M | $18.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $120.0M | $18.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $15.9M | $17.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $46.3M | $11.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $92.7M | $13.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $68.3M | $15.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 78.6% | 37.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 89.5% | 31.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 32.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 14.9% | 32.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 45.6% | 23.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 90.2% | 25.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 59.5% | 32.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | 28.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | 75.9% | 30.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 87.2% | 24.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 112.5% | 25.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.8% | 25.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 44.4% | 19.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 89.9% | 20.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 59.3% | 24.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.78 | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $0.85 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.69 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.67 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.65 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.42 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.49 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.58 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.5M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $76.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $593.9M |
| Total Assets | $1.3B | $7.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.13× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $21.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $26.7M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $76.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $76.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $131.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $131.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $131.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $156.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $156.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $156.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | $593.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $592.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $588.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $568.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $557.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $538.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $543.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $518.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | $7.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $7.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $7.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $7.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $7.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $7.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $7.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | $7.4B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.13× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.13× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.22× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.23× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.24× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.29× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.29× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.30× |
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 | $65.1M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.90× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $65.1M | $97.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $99.8M | $22.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $80.5M | $34.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.8M | $20.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $91.0M | $90.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $93.2M | $21.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $100.4M | $25.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $92.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $21.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $32.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $19.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $75.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $15.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $21.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 121.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 28.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 44.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 28.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 129.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 23.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 33.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 6.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 25.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 8.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 7.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.90× | 4.26× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.09× | 1.20× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.67× | 1.88× | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.07× | 1.15× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.96× | 7.98× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.01× | 1.60× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.47× | 1.64× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BSM
| Oil Reserves | $46.4M | 49% |
| Natural Gas Reserves | $44.1M | 46% |
| Real Estate | $4.7M | 5% |
CPF
Segment breakdown not available.
