vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of MINERALS TECHNOLOGIES INC (MTX) and TMC the metals Co Inc. (TMC), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
MINERALS TECHNOLOGIES INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($519.5M vs $1.3M, roughly 403.3× TMC the metals Co Inc.). MINERALS TECHNOLOGIES INC runs the higher net margin — 7.2% vs -3136.5%, a 3143.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, TMC the metals Co Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (2425.5% vs 0.3%). MINERALS TECHNOLOGIES INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($31.9M vs $-11.5M). Over the past eight quarters, TMC the metals Co Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (150.7% CAGR vs -1.4%).
Compass Minerals International, Inc is an American public company that, through its subsidiaries, is a leading producer of minerals, including salt, magnesium chloride and sulfate of potash. Based in Overland Park, Kansas; the company provides bulk treated and untreated highway deicing salt to customers in North America and the United Kingdom and plant nutrition products to growers worldwide. Compass Minerals also produces consumer deicing and water conditioning products, consumer and commerc...
The Metals Company, formerly DeepGreen Metals, is a Canadian deep sea mining exploration company. The company focuses on the mining of polymetallic nodules in the Clarion Clipperton Zone of the Pacific.
MTX vs TMC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $519.5M | $1.3M |
| Net Profit | $37.2M | $-40.4M |
| Gross Margin | 24.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | 11.9% | -3470.9% |
| Net Margin | 7.2% | -3136.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 0.3% | 2425.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | -31.1% | -151.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.11 | $0.11 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $519.5M | $1.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $532.4M | $1.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $528.9M | $147.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $491.8M | $19.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $518.1M | $51.0K | ||
| Q3 24 | $524.7M | $7.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $541.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $534.5M | $102.0K |
| Q4 25 | $37.2M | $-40.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $43.0M | $-184.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $45.4M | $-74.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-144.0M | $-20.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $54.0M | $-16.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $46.7M | $-20.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $46.7M | $-25.2M |
| Q4 25 | 24.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 25.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 25.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 25.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 26.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 25.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | 11.9% | -3470.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.3% | -4134.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.1% | -14949.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -32.6% | -94815.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.2% | -32054.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.6% | -285171.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 14.1% | -24198.0% |
| Q4 25 | 7.2% | -3136.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.1% | -13780.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.6% | -50572.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -29.3% | -108357.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.4% | -31492.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.9% | -293142.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.7% | -24700.0% |
| Q4 25 | $1.11 | $0.11 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.37 | $0.46 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.44 | $0.20 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-4.51 | $0.06 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.67 | $0.05 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.45 | $0.06 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.61 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.44 | $0.08 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $332.6M | $117.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $961.3M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.7B | $-33.4M |
| Total Assets | $3.5B | $181.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.56× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $332.6M | $117.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $328.3M | $115.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $319.9M | $115.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $312.2M | $2.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $337.1M | $3.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $324.5M | $360.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $316.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $320.1M | $4.0M |
| Q4 25 | $961.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $964.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $965.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $966.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $966.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $922.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $922.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $925.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | $-33.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $-40.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $81.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | $-16.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.7B | $-17.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.7B | $-21.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7B | $1.8M |
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | $181.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.5B | $175.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.5B | $173.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.4B | $64.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.4B | $63.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4B | $61.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.3B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.3B | $65.5M |
| Q4 25 | 0.56× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.58× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.58× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.60× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.55× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.54× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.55× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.56× | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $64.3M | $-11.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $31.9M | $-11.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 6.1% | -889.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 6.2% | 8.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.73× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $86.6M | $-43.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $64.3M | $-11.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $70.9M | $-11.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.9M | $-10.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-4.4M | $-9.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $70.4M | $-13.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $60.0M | $-5.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $50.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $55.9M | $-11.9M |
| Q4 25 | $31.9M | $-11.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $43.6M | $-11.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $33.8M | $-10.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-22.7M | $-9.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $42.3M | $-13.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $35.3M | $-5.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $29.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $39.4M | $-12.2M |
| Q4 25 | 6.1% | -889.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.2% | -859.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 6.4% | -7287.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.6% | -49563.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.2% | -27139.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.7% | -82657.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.4% | -11952.9% |
| Q4 25 | 6.2% | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.1% | 1.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.5% | 34.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.7% | 368.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.4% | 98.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.7% | 714.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.7% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.1% | 333.3% |
| Q4 25 | 1.73× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.65× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.39× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.30× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.28× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.54× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.20× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
MTX
| High Temperature Technologies | $178.0M | 34% |
| Specialty Additives | $141.8M | 27% |
| Household And Personal Care | $132.5M | 26% |
| Environmental And Infrastructure | $67.2M | 13% |
TMC
Segment breakdown not available.
