vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CMB.TECH NV (CMBT) and Gaming & Leisure Properties, Inc. (GLPI). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
CMB.TECH NV is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($592.8M vs $420.0M, roughly 1.4× Gaming & Leisure Properties, Inc.). Gaming & Leisure Properties, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 57.0% vs 32.3%, a 24.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Gaming & Leisure Properties, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (6.3% vs -34.6%).
CMB.TECH, before October 2024 known as Euronav, is a crude oil tanker transport company, which consists of VLCCs, Suezmaxes and FSOs.
Gaming and Leisure Properties, Inc. is a real estate investment trust (REIT) specializing in casino properties, based in Wyomissing, Pennsylvania. It was formed in November 2013 as a corporate spin-off from Penn National Gaming. The company owns 62 casino properties, all of which are leased to other companies.
CMBT vs GLPI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2024 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $592.8M | $420.0M |
| Net Profit | $191.2M | $239.4M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 46.4% | 79.4% |
| Net Margin | 32.3% | 57.0% |
| Revenue YoY | -34.6% | 6.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | -63.3% | 40.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.01 | — |
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 | — | $420.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $407.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $397.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $394.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $395.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $592.8M | $389.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $385.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $380.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | $239.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $275.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $241.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $151.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $165.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $191.2M | $223.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $184.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $208.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | 79.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 89.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 84.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 61.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 65.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 46.4% | 79.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 70.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 77.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | 57.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 67.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 60.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 38.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 41.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 32.3% | 57.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 47.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 54.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $0.96 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.85 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.54 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.60 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.01 | $0.79 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.67 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.77 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $38.9M | $274.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $2.6B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.2B | $5.0B |
| Total Assets | $3.9B | $13.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 2.20× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $274.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $38.9M | $560.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $560.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $560.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $7.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $7.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $6.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $6.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.6B | $7.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $7.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $6.6B |
| Q1 26 | — | $5.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $4.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $4.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $4.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $4.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $4.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | $13.8B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $12.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $12.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $12.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $12.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.9B | $13.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $12.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $11.8B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.56× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.57× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.51× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.63× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.20× | 1.81× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.74× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.60× |
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 | $204.4M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.07× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $240.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $293.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $252.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $204.4M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $270.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $252.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $183.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $272.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $239.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $261.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $245.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 46.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 69.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 60.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 275.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 67.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 64.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 14.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 5.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 4.10× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.00× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.94× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.53× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.07× | 4.80× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.46× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.21× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
