vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of PEABODY ENERGY CORP (BTU) and EPAM Systems (EPAM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
EPAM Systems is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.4B vs $1.0B, roughly 1.4× PEABODY ENERGY CORP). EPAM Systems runs the higher net margin — 7.8% vs 1.2%, a 6.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, EPAM Systems posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (12.8% vs -9.0%). Over the past eight quarters, EPAM Systems's revenue compounded faster (9.9% CAGR vs 1.9%).
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.
EPAM Systems, Inc. is an American company that specializes in software engineering services, digital platform engineering, and digital product design, operating out of Newtown, Pennsylvania. EPAM is a founding member of the MACH Alliance.
BTU vs EPAM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.0B | $1.4B |
| Net Profit | $12.4M | $109.4M |
| Gross Margin | — | 30.1% |
| Operating Margin | 0.8% | 10.6% |
| Net Margin | 1.2% | 7.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -9.0% | 12.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -67.2% | 5.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.11 | $1.97 |
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 | $1.0B | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $890.1M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $937.0M | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $983.6M | $1.2B |
| Q4 25 | $12.4M | $109.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-70.1M | $106.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-27.6M | $88.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $34.4M | $73.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $37.8M | $103.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $101.3M | $136.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $199.4M | $98.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $39.6M | $116.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 30.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 29.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 28.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 26.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 30.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 34.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 29.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 28.4% |
| Q4 25 | 0.8% | 10.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -8.0% | 10.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -4.3% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.4% | 7.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.6% | 10.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.0% | 15.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.4% | 10.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.2% | 9.5% |
| Q4 25 | 1.2% | 7.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -6.9% | 7.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.1% | 6.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.7% | 5.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.4% | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.3% | 11.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.1% | 8.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.0% | 10.0% |
| Q4 25 | $0.11 | $1.97 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.58 | $1.91 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.23 | $1.56 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.27 | $1.28 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.25 | $1.80 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.74 | $2.37 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.42 | $1.70 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.29 | $1.97 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $575.3M | $1.3B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $321.2M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.5B | $3.7B |
| Total Assets | $5.8B | $4.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.09× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $575.3M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $603.3M | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $585.9M | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $696.5M | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $700.4M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $772.9M | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $621.7M | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $855.7M | $2.0B |
| 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 | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.5B | $3.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.6B | $3.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7B | $3.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6B | $3.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.7B | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.5B | $3.5B |
| Q4 25 | $5.8B | $4.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.7B | $4.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.8B | $4.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.8B | $4.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.0B | $4.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.9B | $4.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.9B | $4.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.7B | $4.4B |
| 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 | $68.6M | $282.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $268.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 19.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 5.53× | 2.59× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $612.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $68.6M | $282.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $122.0M | $294.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.2M | $53.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $119.9M | $24.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $119.8M | $130.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $359.9M | $242.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.8M | $57.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $119.0M | $129.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | $268.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $286.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $43.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $14.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $114.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $237.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $52.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $123.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 19.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 20.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 9.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 10.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.6% |
| Q4 25 | 5.53× | 2.59× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.76× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.60× | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.49× | 0.33× | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.17× | 1.26× | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.55× | 1.77× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.04× | 0.58× | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.01× | 1.12× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
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% |
EPAM
Segment breakdown not available.
