vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of MATTHEWS INTERNATIONAL CORP (MATW) and Opera Ltd (OPRA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
MATTHEWS INTERNATIONAL CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($284.8M vs $142.7M, roughly 2.0× Opera Ltd). MATTHEWS INTERNATIONAL CORP runs the higher net margin — 15.3% vs 12.8%, a 2.5% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Matthews Aurora Funeral Solutions is one of the largest manufacturers of caskets and funerary urns in the United States, selling over 38% of the country's caskets as of 2005. The Aurora, Indiana–based company is a subsidiary of Pittsburgh-based Matthews International. The company makes both wooden and metal caskets and urns for holding cremated remains. It also provides supplies and consulting services for funeral homes.
Opera is a multinational technology corporation headquartered in Oslo, Norway, with additional offices in Europe, China, and Africa. Opera offers a range of products and services that include PC and mobile web browsers, GameMaker and gaming portals, the Opera News content recommendation products, the Opera Ads platform, and a number of Web3 and e-commerce products and services. The company's total user base is 296 million monthly active users.
MATW vs OPRA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $284.8M | $142.7M |
| Net Profit | $43.6M | $18.3M |
| Gross Margin | 35.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | 34.2% | 14.8% |
| Net Margin | 15.3% | 12.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -29.1% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 1356.6% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.39 | — |
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 | $284.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $142.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $211.6M |
| Q4 25 | $43.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $18.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $34.1M |
| Q4 25 | 35.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 34.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 14.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 19.6% |
| Q4 25 | 15.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 12.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 16.1% |
| Q4 25 | $1.39 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $31.4M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $529.8M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $543.2M | — |
| Total Assets | $1.6B | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.98× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $31.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $529.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $543.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.98× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 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 | $-52.0M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-57.2M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -20.1% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.8% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -1.19× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-52.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $-57.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -20.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -1.19× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
