vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Great Elm Group, Inc. (GEG) and INNSUITES HOSPITALITY TRUST (IHT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Great Elm Group, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.0M vs $1.8M, roughly 1.7× INNSUITES HOSPITALITY TRUST). INNSUITES HOSPITALITY TRUST runs the higher net margin — -19.8% vs -549.6%, a 529.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, INNSUITES HOSPITALITY TRUST posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-1.1% vs -14.1%). Over the past eight quarters, INNSUITES HOSPITALITY TRUST's revenue compounded faster (2.1% CAGR vs -4.6%).
Great Elm Group, Inc. is an alternative asset management firm that offers private credit products, real asset investment vehicles, and customized capital solutions for small and medium-sized enterprises. It primarily serves institutional investors and high-net-worth individuals across the North American market.
InnSuites Hospitality Trust, based in Phoenix, Arizona, is a real estate investment trust that invests in lodging. While it is formed as a real estate investment trust, it is not classified as a real estate investment trust for tax purposes. The company owns interests in two hotels, operates three hotels, provides management for three hotels, and licenses its InnSuites trademark for five hotels. The company's hotel ownership interests are a 51.01% interest in the Best Western InnSuites Tucson...
GEG vs IHT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.0M | $1.8M |
| Net Profit | $-16.5M | $-356.9K |
| Gross Margin | 99.5% | — |
| Operating Margin | -140.6% | -10.0% |
| Net Margin | -549.6% | -19.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -14.1% | -1.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1507.1% | -29.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.50 | $-0.04 |
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 | $3.0M | $1.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.8M | $1.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.2M | $1.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.5M | $1.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.0M | $1.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $7.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.8M | $1.7M |
| Q4 25 | $-16.5M | $-356.9K | ||
| Q3 25 | $-7.9M | $-391.2K | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-121.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $-4.5M | $-595.2K | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2M | $-276.4K | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.6M | $-370.9K | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-148.6K | ||
| Q1 24 | $-3.1M | $-113.0K |
| Q4 25 | 99.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 37.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 86.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 84.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -140.6% | -10.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -34.5% | -13.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 10.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -79.6% | -30.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | -56.4% | -7.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | -50.0% | -15.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -67.1% | -35.3% |
| Q4 25 | -549.6% | -19.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -73.3% | -21.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -5.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -140.1% | -36.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 33.5% | -15.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 66.1% | -20.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -2.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -111.2% | -6.5% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.50 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.24 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.01 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.17 | $-0.07 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.04 | $-0.03 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.08 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.02 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.10 | $-0.02 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $51.2M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $11.3M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $55.8M | $3.6M |
| Total Assets | $135.5M | $13.9M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 3.12× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $51.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $53.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $31.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $44.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $44.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $44.1M | $1.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $11.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $11.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $10.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $10.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $10.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $9.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $9.7M |
| Q4 25 | $55.8M | $3.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $73.8M | $4.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $57.2M | $4.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $62.3M | $5.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $63.9M | $5.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $6.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $65.0M | $6.2M |
| Q4 25 | $135.5M | $13.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $155.0M | $14.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $14.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $137.2M | $14.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $138.5M | $15.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $137.3M | $15.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $15.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $148.4M | $15.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | 3.12× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.82× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.37× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.34× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.98× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.81× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.61× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.58× |
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 | $-1.9M | $-145.1K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-1.9M | $-145.1K | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.8M | $-153.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $279.8K | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.3M | $-1.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-4.0M | $-146.7K | ||
| Q3 24 | $-5.8M | $-44.6K | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-459.4K | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4M | $1.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.44× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.19× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GEG
| Management Service Base | $1.8M | 60% |
| Other | $1.2M | 40% |
IHT
| Room | $1.7M | 96% |
| Other | $74.1K | 4% |
