vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of GOLD FIELDS LTD (GFI) and Venture Global, Inc. (VG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
GOLD FIELDS LTD is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($5.2B vs $4.4B, roughly 1.2× Venture Global, Inc.). Venture Global, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 26.8% vs 24.8%, a 2.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Venture Global, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (191.7% vs 15.6%). GOLD FIELDS LTD produced more free cash flow last quarter ($423.6M vs $-1.5B).
Gold Fields Limited is one of the world's largest gold mining firms. Headquartered in Johannesburg, South Africa, the company is listed on both the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) and the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). The firm was formed in 1998 with the amalgamation of the gold assets of Gold Fields of South Africa Limited and Gencor Limited. The company traces its roots back to 1887, when Cecil Rhodes founded Gold Fields of South Africa Limited. As of 2019, Gold Fields was the world's e...
S&P Global Inc. is an American publicly traded corporation headquartered in Manhattan, New York. Its primary areas of business are financial information, analytics, and energy and commodities intelligence. It is the parent company of S&P Global Ratings, S&P Global Energy, S&P Global Market Intelligence, S&P Global Mobility, and the Indian credit rating agency CRISIL. It is also the majority owner of the S&P Dow Jones Indices joint venture. "S&P" is a shortening of "Standard and Poor's".
GFI vs VG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2024 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $5.2B | $4.4B |
| Net Profit | $1.3B | $1.2B |
| Gross Margin | 45.3% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | 38.7% |
| Net Margin | 24.8% | 26.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 15.6% | 191.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 77.7% | 20.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.38 | $0.41 |
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 | — | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.2B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $926.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.4B |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $550.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $475.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $517.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | $990.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-294.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $352.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $698.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 45.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 38.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 39.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 33.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 37.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 39.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 20.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 32.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 43.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | 26.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 16.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 15.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 17.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 24.8% | 65.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -31.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 31.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 49.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.41 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.16 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.14 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.15 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.38 | $0.35 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.15 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.12 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.25 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $860.2M | $2.4B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $2.5B | $34.2B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $5.4B | $6.7B |
| Total Assets | $10.1B | $53.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.46× | 5.07× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $860.2M | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $34.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $32.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $30.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $29.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.5B | $29.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $6.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $5.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.4B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $53.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $50.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $46.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $45.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.1B | $43.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.07× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 5.73× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 5.69× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 6.01× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.46× | 10.11× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $1.6B | $2.1B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $423.6M | $-1.5B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 8.1% | -34.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 22.8% | 81.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.25× | 1.77× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-6.8B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $638.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-2.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $423.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-2.4B |
| Q4 25 | — | -34.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -42.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -49.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -81.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -167.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 81.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 98.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 96.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 119.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 212.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.77× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.42× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.07× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.15× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.25× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.91× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GFI
Segment breakdown not available.
VG
| Plaquemines Project Segment | $3.4B | 76% |
| Calcasieu Project Segment | $841.0M | 19% |
| Other | $208.0M | 5% |
