vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ReTo Eco-Solutions, Inc. (RETO) and TIAN RUIXIANG HOLDINGS LTD (TIRX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
TIAN RUIXIANG HOLDINGS LTD is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.0M vs $1.0M, roughly 1.9× ReTo Eco-Solutions, Inc.). TIAN RUIXIANG HOLDINGS LTD runs the higher net margin — -12.3% vs -131.6%, a 119.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, ReTo Eco-Solutions, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (36.6% vs -35.8%). TIAN RUIXIANG HOLDINGS LTD produced more free cash flow last quarter ($263.1K vs $-1.7M).
ReTo Eco-Solutions, Inc. develops and supplies eco-friendly construction materials, environmental remediation services, and solid waste treatment solutions. Its core offerings include recycled construction aggregates, soil improvement products, and ecological restoration systems, primarily serving infrastructure, real estate, and environmental conservation sectors across the Chinese market.
Tian Ruixiang Holdings Ltd is a China-based insurance intermediary service provider. It distributes various insurance products including property insurance, casualty insurance and life insurance from multiple partner insurance carriers, catering to both individual and corporate clients mainly across regional markets in mainland China.
RETO vs TIRX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.0M | $2.0M |
| Net Profit | $-1.4M | $-248.3K |
| Gross Margin | 17.7% | 85.6% |
| Operating Margin | -133.0% | -6.7% |
| Net Margin | -131.6% | -12.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 36.6% | -35.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -103.5% | -159.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-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 | $1.0M | $2.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $768.4K | $3.1M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $724.9K | ||
| Q2 22 | $2.9M | $945.6K |
| Q2 25 | $-1.4M | $-248.3K | ||
| Q2 24 | $-678.5K | $418.9K | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-1.5M | ||
| Q2 22 | $-5.7M | $-3.5M |
| Q2 25 | 17.7% | 85.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 43.3% | 89.7% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 13.0% | — |
| Q2 25 | -133.0% | -6.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -68.0% | 18.6% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -266.0% | ||
| Q2 22 | -195.8% | -410.3% |
| Q2 25 | -131.6% | -12.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -88.3% | 13.4% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -205.0% | ||
| Q2 22 | -196.4% | -370.5% |
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.02 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.25 | $0.01 | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-2.50 | ||
| Q2 22 | $-0.16 | $-1.42 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.5M | $28.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $3.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $30.4M | $-16.1M |
| Total Assets | $41.4M | $6.0M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $2.5M | $28.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6M | $27.5M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $35.9M | ||
| Q2 22 | $832.4K | $29.0M |
| Q2 25 | — | $3.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | $30.4M | $-16.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.3M | $32.3M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $34.5M | ||
| Q2 22 | $13.5M | $37.1M |
| Q2 25 | $41.4M | $6.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $33.7M | $38.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $37.0M | ||
| Q2 22 | $33.9M | $38.6M |
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 | $-1.6M | $263.7K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-1.7M | $263.1K |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -157.4% | 13.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.1% | 0.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $-1.6M | $263.7K | ||
| Q2 24 | $-4.8M | $-646.8K | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $761.6K | ||
| Q2 22 | $-9.3M | $-75.6K |
| Q2 25 | $-1.7M | $263.1K | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | $-78.0K |
| Q2 25 | -157.4% | 13.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | -8.3% |
| Q2 25 | 5.1% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 22 | — | 0.3% |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -1.54× | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
