vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Danaos Corp (DAC) and HOPE BANCORP INC (HOPE). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Danaos Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($262.2M vs $141.0M, roughly 1.9× HOPE BANCORP INC). Danaos Corp runs the higher net margin — 49.9% vs 20.9%, a 29.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, HOPE BANCORP INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (21.0% vs 6.4%).
Danaos Corporation is a leading global containership ownership and management firm. It operates a large fleet of modern container vessels, providing long-term charter services to top international container liner operators across major global trade routes, supporting the efficiency and reliability of global supply chains.
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.
DAC vs HOPE — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $262.2M | $141.0M |
| Net Profit | $130.9M | $29.5M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 47.9% | — |
| Net Margin | 49.9% | 20.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 6.4% | 21.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -7.3% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $7.12 | $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 | — | $145.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $141.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $262.2M | $94.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $116.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $118.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $116.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $246.3M | $116.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | $29.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $30.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $130.9M | $-24.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $21.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $24.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $141.2M | $25.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 26.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 25.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 47.9% | -27.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 23.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 25.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 27.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 56.8% | 29.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | 20.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 21.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 49.9% | -26.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 18.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 20.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 57.3% | 21.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.23 | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $0.27 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.24 | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.12 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.17 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.20 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.20 | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.23 | $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 | $654.1M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.6B | $2.3B |
| Total Assets | $4.5B | $18.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $654.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $471.7M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.6B | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.3B | $2.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | $18.7B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $18.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $18.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.5B | $18.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $17.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $17.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $17.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.0B | $17.4B |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
