vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Chatham Lodging Trust (CLDT) and Kimbell Royalty Partners, LP (KRP). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Kimbell Royalty Partners, LP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($82.5M vs $67.5M, roughly 1.2× Chatham Lodging Trust). Kimbell Royalty Partners, LP runs the higher net margin — 30.1% vs 1.1%, a 29.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Kimbell Royalty Partners, LP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (23.6% vs -1.6%). Over the past eight quarters, Kimbell Royalty Partners, LP's revenue compounded faster (0.1% CAGR vs -11.6%).
Chatham Lodging Trust is a publicly traded real estate investment trust that invests in, owns, and operates upscale extended-stay and select-service premium hotel properties primarily across high-demand urban and suburban markets in the United States. Its portfolio targets assets with strong occupancy rates and steady cash flow from business and leisure traveler segments.
Kimbell Royalty Partners, LP is a publicly traded US limited partnership focused on owning and acquiring mineral and royalty interests in oil and gas properties across key domestic producing basins including the Permian, Bakken, and Eagle Ford. Its core revenue comes from production-linked royalty payments from its diversified onshore hydrocarbon asset portfolio.
CLDT vs KRP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $67.5M | $82.5M |
| Net Profit | $725.0K | $24.8M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 2.4% | 39.6% |
| Net Margin | 1.1% | 30.1% |
| Revenue YoY | -1.6% | 23.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 163.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | — |
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 | $67.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $67.7M | $82.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $78.4M | $80.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $80.3M | $86.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $68.6M | $84.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $75.1M | $66.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $87.2M | $83.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $86.5M | $76.6M |
| Q1 26 | $725.0K | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.6M | $24.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.5M | $22.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.4M | $26.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.5M | $25.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.7M | $-39.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.3M | $25.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.8M | $15.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 40.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 44.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 46.1% | — |
| Q1 26 | 2.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 15.9% | 39.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.7% | 35.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.8% | 43.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.1% | 39.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.5% | -58.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.3% | 40.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.3% | 31.2% |
| Q1 26 | 1.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 6.8% | 30.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.5% | 27.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.7% | 30.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | 30.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -2.3% | -58.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.9% | 30.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.9% | 19.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.05 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.03 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.07 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.01 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.08 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.05 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.10 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $13.7M | $44.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $722.9M | — |
| Total Assets | $1.2B | $1.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $13.7M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $24.4M | $44.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.2M | $40.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.2M | $34.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $18.6M | $35.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $20.2M | $34.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $19.3M | $34.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.6M | $30.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $338.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $338.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $351.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $381.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $406.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $722.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $740.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $749.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $754.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $754.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $758.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $765.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $766.5M | — |
| Q1 26 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $1.2B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.46× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.45× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.47× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.50× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.54× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 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 | — | $57.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 2.31× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $64.1M | $57.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $25.6M | $62.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $22.1M | $72.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.2M | $54.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $73.8M | $56.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $28.8M | $62.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.2M | $62.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 13.90× | 2.31× | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.24× | 2.81× | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.10× | 2.71× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.73× | 2.09× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.78× | 2.42× | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.68× | 4.14× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CLDT
| Room | $61.2M | 91% |
| Other | $4.7M | 7% |
| Food and beverage | $1.6M | 2% |
KRP
| Oil And Condensate | $45.9M | 56% |
| Natural Gas Midstream | $19.5M | 24% |
| NGL Revenue | $10.6M | 13% |
| Other | $6.4M | 8% |
