vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Plymouth Industrial REIT, Inc. (PLYM) and Vera Bradley, Inc. (VRA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Vera Bradley, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($62.3M vs $51.2M, roughly 1.2× Plymouth Industrial REIT, Inc.). Vera Bradley, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -19.9% vs -106.3%, a 86.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Plymouth Industrial REIT, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-1.4% vs -22.7%). Over the past eight quarters, Vera Bradley, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (16.1% CAGR vs 0.4%).
Plymouth Industrial REIT, Inc. is a real estate investment trust focused on owning, operating, and acquiring high-quality industrial properties including distribution centers, warehouses, and light industrial facilities across key U.S. logistics hubs. It serves tenants in e-commerce, retail, manufacturing, and third-party logistics sectors, supporting diverse business supply chain needs.
Vera Bradley Sales, LLC is an American luggage and handbag design company, founded by Barbara Bradley Baekgaard and Patricia R. Miller in 1982. As of 2019, its home office is in Fort Wayne, Indiana. The company was named after Baekgaard's mother. Its original luxury cotton bag product lines have expanded to include fashion and home accessories, office supplies, and patterned gifts. Many items have distinctive florals, paisleys, or geometric prints with complementary linings, as well as elonga...
PLYM vs VRA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $51.2M | $62.3M |
| Net Profit | $-54.4M | $-12.4M |
| Gross Margin | — | 42.1% |
| Operating Margin | -102.5% | -19.6% |
| Net Margin | -106.3% | -19.9% |
| Revenue YoY | -1.4% | -22.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | -248.5% | 3.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-1.23 | $-0.44 |
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 | — | $62.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $51.2M | $70.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $47.2M | $51.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $45.6M | $100.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $47.6M | $70.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $51.9M | $94.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $48.7M | $67.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $50.2M | $46.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-12.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-54.4M | $-4.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.1M | $-33.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.8M | $-47.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $147.4M | $-12.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-15.6M | $5.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3M | $-8.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.2M | $-1.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | 42.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 50.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 44.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 45.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 54.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 49.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 50.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 37.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | -19.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -102.5% | -6.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -10.3% | -34.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -23.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -11.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -29.6% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.7% | -15.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -3.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | -19.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -106.3% | -6.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -12.9% | -64.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.8% | -47.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 309.9% | -18.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -30.1% | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.7% | -12.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 12.4% | -4.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.44 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.23 | $-0.17 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.14 | $-1.20 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.13 | $-1.62 | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.24 | $-0.46 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.35 | $0.19 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.03 | $-0.26 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.14 | $-0.06 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $10.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $10.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $470.1M | $128.1M |
| Total Assets | $1.6B | $243.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.08× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $10.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $15.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $11.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $30.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $13.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $44.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $55.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $77.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $10.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0 | ||
| Q4 24 | $646.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $128.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $470.1M | $140.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $539.6M | $146.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $571.0M | $179.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $579.5M | $225.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $436.5M | $242.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $475.2M | $245.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $484.6M | $259.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | $243.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $266.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.6B | $267.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $306.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $359.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $379.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $368.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | $380.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.08× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.07× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.00× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.12× | — | ||
| 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 | $20.0M | $-4.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-4.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -7.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.7% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-13.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $-4.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $20.0M | $-5.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.4M | $-17.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $15.6M | $21.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $96.1M | $-22.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.6M | $1.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.9M | $-14.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $16.6M | $26.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-4.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-6.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-19.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $17.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-25.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-1.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-15.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $25.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | -7.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -8.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -38.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 17.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -35.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -1.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -22.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 55.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.67× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.65× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.25× | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.12× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.67× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
PLYM
Segment breakdown not available.
VRA
| Bags | $23.9M | 38% |
| Indirect | $12.6M | 20% |
| Transferred At Point In Time | $12.2M | 20% |
| Accessories | $7.2M | 12% |
| Home | $3.5M | 6% |
| Apparel Footwear | $1.8M | 3% |
| Other Products | $1.5M | 2% |
