vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Idaho Strategic Resources, Inc. (IDR) and MIND TECHNOLOGY, INC (MIND). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Idaho Strategic Resources, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($14.6M vs $9.7M, roughly 1.5× MIND TECHNOLOGY, INC). Idaho Strategic Resources, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 64.3% vs 0.6%, a 63.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Idaho Strategic Resources, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (92.0% vs -20.0%). Idaho Strategic Resources, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($8.2M vs $801.0K). Over the past eight quarters, Idaho Strategic Resources, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (57.2% CAGR vs -14.9%).
Idaho Strategic Resources, Inc.IDREarnings & Financial Report
Idaho Strategic Resources, Inc. is a U.S.-based natural resource company focused on the exploration, development, and production of critical and strategic minerals. Primarily operating in Idaho, it targets rare earth elements, gold, silver, and other high-demand minerals, supplying products to the clean energy, defense, and industrial manufacturing sectors across North America.
Mitcham Industries, Inc. is a company founded in 1987, and is based in Huntsville, Texas. The company markets geophysical and other equipment to seismic data acquisition contractors conducting surveys on land, marsh, and marine areas, both shallow and deep water. There are mainly two segments operating in the company, namely an Equipment Leasing segment and an Equipment Manufacturing segment. In October 2011, the Company opened a new logistics and repair facility in Budapest, Hungary, and thr...
IDR vs MIND — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $14.6M | $9.7M |
| Net Profit | $9.4M | $62.0K |
| Gross Margin | 68.5% | 46.6% |
| Operating Margin | 62.4% | 8.0% |
| Net Margin | 64.3% | 0.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 92.0% | -20.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 220.6% | -95.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.62 | — |
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 | $14.6M | $9.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.1M | $13.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.5M | $7.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.3M | $15.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.6M | $12.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.2M | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.1M | $9.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.9M | $13.4M |
| Q4 25 | $9.4M | $62.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.0M | $1.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8M | $-970.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6M | $2.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.9M | $1.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6M | $798.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2M | $954.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.2M | $1.4M |
| Q4 25 | 68.5% | 46.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 63.6% | 50.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 57.8% | 42.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 50.8% | 43.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 53.3% | 44.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 48.7% | 47.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 50.2% | 43.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 48.1% | 46.7% |
| Q4 25 | 62.4% | 8.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 23.4% | 19.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.6% | -8.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.3% | 18.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 36.2% | 15.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.4% | 14.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.2% | 7.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 36.3% | 17.3% |
| Q4 25 | 64.3% | 0.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.8% | 14.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 29.2% | -12.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 22.1% | 13.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 38.5% | 10.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 25.8% | 8.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 35.2% | 9.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 36.8% | 10.8% |
| Q4 25 | $0.62 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.20 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.20 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.12 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.21 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.12 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.17 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.17 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $19.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $2.3M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $108.2M | $39.9M |
| Total Assets | $116.2M | $47.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.02× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $19.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $7.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $9.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $5.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.3M | $924.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.3M | $5.3M |
| Q4 25 | $2.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | $108.2M | $39.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $74.3M | $28.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $49.3M | $26.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $39.8M | $27.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $37.7M | $25.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $33.1M | $24.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.4M | $23.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $21.6M | $22.6M |
| Q4 25 | $116.2M | $47.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $83.1M | $35.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $57.7M | $36.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $48.1M | $36.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $44.0M | $36.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $40.8M | $37.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $32.2M | $34.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $28.7M | $33.5M |
| Q4 25 | 0.02× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.04× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.07× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.09× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.05× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.09× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.11× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.15× | — |
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 | $10.7M | $894.0K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $8.2M | $801.0K |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 56.0% | 8.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 17.7% | 1.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.15× | 14.42× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $12.4M | $5.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.7M | $894.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4M | $-1.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.5M | $4.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4M | $2.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.2M | $2.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.5M | $1.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.6M | $-4.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.6M | $657.0K |
| Q4 25 | $8.2M | $801.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $709.8K | $-1.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5M | $3.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0M | $1.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.1M | $2.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9M | $978.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.4M | $-4.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.3M | $566.0K |
| Q4 25 | 56.0% | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.4% | -9.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.5% | 48.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.8% | 12.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 28.0% | 18.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 30.4% | 9.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 38.7% | -49.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 38.3% | 4.2% |
| Q4 25 | 17.7% | 1.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.3% | 1.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.8% | 3.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.4% | 1.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.6% | 0.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.8% | 0.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.3% | 0.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.5% | 0.7% |
| Q4 25 | 1.15× | 14.42× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.81× | -0.60× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.28× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.50× | 1.01× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.08× | 1.77× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.56× | 1.33× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.22× | -4.98× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.19× | 0.46× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
