vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of GLOBUS MARITIME LTD (GLBS) and Himalaya Shipping Ltd. (HSHP). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Himalaya Shipping Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($29.9M vs $9.5M, roughly 3.1× GLOBUS MARITIME LTD). Himalaya Shipping Ltd. runs the higher net margin — 3.7% vs -19.6%, a 23.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, GLOBUS MARITIME LTD posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (0.2% vs -4.2%).
Globus Maritime Ltd is a global shipping enterprise specializing in ownership, operation and chartering of dry bulk cargo vessels. It transports iron ore, coal, grain and other industrial raw materials across major global trade routes, serving clients in logistics, commodities trading and manufacturing sectors worldwide.
Himalaya Shipping Ltd. is a global maritime transportation enterprise focused on dry bulk shipping operations. It operates a fleet of modern, fuel-efficient bulk carriers that transport key commodities including iron ore, coal, grain and other bulk raw materials, serving core trade routes across Asia, Europe, and the Americas to support global industrial and agricultural supply chain flows.
GLBS vs HSHP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 2025 vs Q2 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $9.5M | $29.9M |
| Net Profit | $-1.9M | $1.1M |
| Gross Margin | — | 76.3% |
| Operating Margin | -4.3% | 45.5% |
| Net Margin | -19.6% | 3.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 0.2% | -4.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -157.0% | -84.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.09 | $0.02 |
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.
| Q2 25 | $9.5M | $29.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.5M | $31.2M | ||
| Q2 23 | $7.8M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $19.1M | — |
| Q2 25 | $-1.9M | $1.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.3M | $6.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | $-1.2M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $11.0M | — |
| Q2 25 | — | 76.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 82.1% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | -4.3% | 45.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 39.2% | 56.1% | ||
| Q2 23 | -17.2% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 57.8% | — |
| Q2 25 | -19.6% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.5% | 22.1% | ||
| Q2 23 | -14.8% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 57.5% | — |
| Q2 25 | $-0.09 | $0.02 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.16 | $0.16 | ||
| Q2 23 | $-0.06 | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $0.53 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $48.3M | $24.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $701.3M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $173.1M | $159.3M |
| Total Assets | $309.4M | $871.9M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 4.40× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $48.3M | $24.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $70.8M | $21.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | $53.2M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $43.6M | — |
| Q2 25 | — | $701.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $725.5M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | $173.1M | $159.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $178.9M | $157.2M | ||
| Q2 23 | $172.1M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $169.5M | — |
| Q2 25 | $309.4M | $871.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $256.3M | $897.3M | ||
| Q2 23 | $217.3M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $206.2M | — |
| Q2 25 | — | 4.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.61× | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
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 | — | $8.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 7.55× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | — | $8.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $17.6M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | — | 7.55× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.55× | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
