vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Commercial Bancgroup, Inc. (CBK) and Himalaya Shipping Ltd. (HSHP). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Himalaya Shipping Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($29.9M vs $23.1M, roughly 1.3× Commercial Bancgroup, Inc.). Commercial Bancgroup, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 41.3% vs 3.7%, a 37.6% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Commercial Bancgroup, Inc.CBKEarnings & Financial Report
Commercial Bancgroup, Inc. operates as a U.S. regional bank holding company that provides a full suite of retail and commercial banking products and services to individual consumers, small and medium-sized businesses, and local institutional clients. Its core offerings include deposit accounts, lending solutions, wealth management, and tailored financial advisory services for regional markets.
Himalaya Shipping Ltd. is a global maritime transportation enterprise focused on dry bulk shipping operations. It operates a fleet of modern, fuel-efficient bulk carriers that transport key commodities including iron ore, coal, grain and other bulk raw materials, serving core trade routes across Asia, Europe, and the Americas to support global industrial and agricultural supply chain flows.
CBK vs HSHP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $23.1M | $29.9M |
| Net Profit | $9.5M | $1.1M |
| Gross Margin | — | 76.3% |
| Operating Margin | — | 45.5% |
| Net Margin | 41.3% | 3.7% |
| Revenue YoY | — | -4.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | 9.7% | -84.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.69 | $0.02 |
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 | $23.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $23.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $29.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $31.2M |
| Q1 26 | $9.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $9.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $6.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 76.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 82.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 53.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 45.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 56.1% |
| Q1 26 | 41.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 42.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 41.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 22.1% |
| Q1 26 | $0.69 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.72 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.77 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.02 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.16 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $24.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $118.2M | $701.3M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $159.3M |
| Total Assets | $2.3B | $871.9M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 4.40× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $154.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $24.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $21.9M |
| Q1 26 | $118.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $166.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $100.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $701.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $725.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $245.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $159.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $157.2M |
| Q1 26 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $871.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $897.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.41× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 4.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.61× |
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 | — | $8.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 7.55× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $28.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $8.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $17.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $26.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 115.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.96× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.55× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.55× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CBK
| Net Interest Income | $20.5M | 89% |
| Noninterest Income | $2.6M | 11% |
HSHP
Segment breakdown not available.
