vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Envela Corp (ELA) and Namib Minerals (NAMM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Envela Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($80.5M vs $41.9M, roughly 1.9× Namib Minerals). Namib Minerals produced more free cash flow last quarter ($7.4M vs $-3.7M).
Envela Corporation is a U.S.-based company that provides recommerce services aimed at extending product lifecycles and reducing resource consumption. The company operates through two primary segments: consumer and commercial.
Namib Minerals is a Namibia-based natural resources firm focused on exploration, development and extraction of high-demand mineral deposits including uranium, copper and lithium. It operates across licensed southern African sites, supplying raw materials to global clean energy, construction and electronics manufacturing sectors.
ELA vs NAMM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $80.5M | $41.9M |
| Net Profit | $6.0M | — |
| Gross Margin | 20.5% | 45.7% |
| Operating Margin | 9.4% | 29.8% |
| Net Margin | 7.4% | — |
| Revenue YoY | 66.6% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 274.6% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.22 | — |
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 | $80.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $57.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $54.9M | $41.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $48.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $48.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $46.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $45.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $39.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $6.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | 20.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 22.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.6% | 45.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 23.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 24.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 25.1% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 25.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | 9.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.9% | 29.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | 7.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | $0.22 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.13 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.11 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.10 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.07 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.06 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.06 | — | ||
| 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 | — | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $9.9M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $67.1M | — |
| Total Assets | $96.0M | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.15× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $19.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | $9.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $14.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | $67.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $61.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $57.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $55.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $52.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $51.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $50.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $49.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | $96.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $90.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $82.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $79.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $77.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $77.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $73.8M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $74.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.15× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.20× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.23× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.24× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.26× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.27× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.29× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.30× | — |
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 | $-3.5M | $11.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-3.7M | $7.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -4.6% | 17.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.2% | 9.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -0.59× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.4M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-3.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.6M | $11.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-789.5K | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-3.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1M | $7.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $746.6K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | -4.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.9% | 17.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | 9.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.1% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | -0.59× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.72× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.94× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.45× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.34× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.05× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.50× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.99× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ELA
| Consumer Segment | $67.7M | 84% |
| Commercial Segment | $12.8M | 16% |
NAMM
Segment breakdown not available.
