vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Caledonia Mining Corp Plc (CMCL) and NEW ENGLAND REALTY ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (NEN). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Caledonia Mining Corp Plc is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($46.9M vs $23.6M, roughly 2.0× NEW ENGLAND REALTY ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP). Caledonia Mining Corp Plc runs the higher net margin — 7.0% vs -677.3%, a 684.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, NEW ENGLAND REALTY ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (15.7% vs 13.8%). Over the past eight quarters, Caledonia Mining Corp Plc's revenue compounded faster (17.1% CAGR vs 8.9%).
Hochschild Mining plc is a leading British-based silver and gold mining business operating in North, Central, and South America. It is headquartered in Lima, Peru, with a corporate office in London, is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 250 Index. The main shareholder is the Peruvian businessman Eduardo Hochschild.
New England Realty Associates Limited Partnership is a real estate investment entity that owns, operates and manages residential and commercial properties primarily across the U.S. New England region. Its core assets include multifamily apartments, mixed-use properties and small commercial spaces, serving tenants across Massachusetts, New Hampshire and adjacent states, delivering steady returns to unitholders via rental income and property value growth.
CMCL vs NEN — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2024 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $46.9M | $23.6M |
| Net Profit | $3.3M | $-1.4M |
| Gross Margin | 41.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | 18.6% | 14.0% |
| Net Margin | 7.0% | -677.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 13.8% | 15.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | -33.3% | -133.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.13 | — |
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 | — | $23.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $23.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $21.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $20.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $20.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $46.9M | $20.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $50.1M | $20.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $38.5M | $19.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-1.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-521.8K | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.3M | $3.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.2M | $4.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1M | $3.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 41.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 45.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 35.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 14.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 20.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 33.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 30.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 32.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.6% | 32.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 32.2% | 32.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.8% | 28.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | -677.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -2.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 19.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 18.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 20.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.0% | 19.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 20.3% | 20.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.4% | 17.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.13 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.42 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.07 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $7.2M | $26.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $531.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $231.0M | — |
| Total Assets | $339.7M | $505.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $26.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $13.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $16.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $30.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $17.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.2M | $15.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.4M | $13.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.8M | $28.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $531.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $514.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $514.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $407.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $408.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $409.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $410.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $410.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $231.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $231.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $220.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $505.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $492.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $494.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $385.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $393.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $339.7M | $387.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $338.5M | $383.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $321.8M | $381.2M |
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 | $4.6M | $27.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.40× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $27.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $12.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $5.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $31.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.6M | $8.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.1M | $5.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $6.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.02× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.44× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.57× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.40× | 2.17× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.87× | 1.32× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.77× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
