vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CORE MOLDING TECHNOLOGIES INC (CMT) and HOPE BANCORP INC (HOPE). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
HOPE BANCORP INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($141.0M vs $74.7M, roughly 1.9× CORE MOLDING TECHNOLOGIES INC). On growth, HOPE BANCORP INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (21.0% vs 19.5%). Over the past eight quarters, HOPE BANCORP INC's revenue compounded faster (9.8% CAGR vs -2.2%).
CORE MOLDING TECHNOLOGIES INCCMTEarnings & Financial Report
Core Molding Technologies, Inc. was founded in 1988 and now based in Columbus, Ohio. The company manufactures sheet molding compounds (SMC), and molds fiberglass reinforced plastics. It occupies over 1,000,000 square feet of manufacturing space and its main subsidiaries are in Matamoros, Mexico, Gaffney, South Carolina, and Cincinnati, Ohio. In 2011, Core Molding Technologies formed Core Specialty Composites, LLC.
Bank of Hope is an American bank, based in Los Angeles, that focuses on the Korean American community. The bank was first established on December 30, 1980, under the name Wilshire Bank.
CMT vs HOPE — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $74.7M | $141.0M |
| Net Profit | — | $29.5M |
| Gross Margin | 15.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | 4.8% | — |
| Net Margin | — | 20.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 19.5% | 21.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.35 | $0.23 |
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 | — | $141.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $74.7M | $145.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $58.4M | $141.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $79.2M | $94.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $61.4M | $116.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $62.5M | $118.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $73.0M | $116.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $88.7M | $116.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | $29.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9M | $30.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.1M | $-24.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.2M | $21.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.2M | $24.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.4M | $25.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 15.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 18.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 16.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 20.0% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 4.8% | 26.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.4% | 25.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.6% | -27.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.6% | 23.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.4% | 25.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.9% | 27.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.4% | 29.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | 20.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.2% | 21.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.1% | -26.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.6% | 18.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.3% | 20.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.2% | 21.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.23 | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.35 | $0.27 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.22 | $0.24 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.47 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.25 | $0.17 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.01 | $0.20 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.36 | $0.20 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.73 | $0.21 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $38.1M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $17.6M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $158.2M | $2.3B |
| Total Assets | $228.1M | $18.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.11× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $38.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $42.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $43.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $44.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $41.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $42.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $37.8M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $17.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $19.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $20.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $20.6M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $158.2M | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $155.4M | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $153.5M | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $149.9M | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $147.4M | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $147.8M | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $147.5M | $2.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | $18.7B | ||
| Q4 25 | $228.1M | $18.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $219.7M | $18.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $219.9M | $18.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $223.6M | $17.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $209.6M | $17.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $220.7M | $17.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $225.7M | $17.4B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.11× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.12× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.12× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.13× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.13× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.14× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.14× | — |
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 | $5.0M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-2.9M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -3.9% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 10.7% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.9M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.0M | $164.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.6M | $51.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.5M | $9.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.1M | $26.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.0M | $116.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $9.2M | $63.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.9M | $-25.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-2.9M | $151.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-346.0K | $47.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $880.0K | $6.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.3M | $24.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $509.0K | $106.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.0M | $60.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.0M | $-28.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -3.9% | 103.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -0.6% | 33.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.1% | 7.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.0% | 20.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.8% | 90.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.6% | 51.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.6% | -24.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 10.7% | 9.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.4% | 3.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.3% | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.9% | 2.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.2% | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.1% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.3% | 2.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.44× | 1.68× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.86× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.79× | 1.26× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.92× | 2.61× | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.47× | -1.01× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
