vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of StubHub Holdings, Inc. (STUB) and Tronox Holdings plc (TROX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Tronox Holdings plc is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($730.0M vs $468.1M, roughly 1.6× StubHub Holdings, Inc.). Tronox Holdings plc runs the higher net margin — -24.1% vs -276.6%, a 252.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Tronox Holdings plc posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (8.0% vs 7.9%). StubHub Holdings, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($180.3M vs $53.0M).
StubHub Holdings operates a leading global online ticket marketplace for live entertainment events. It facilitates secure resale and direct purchase of tickets for concerts, sports matches, theater performances and other live experiences, serving consumers, event organizers and sellers across North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific.
Tronox Limited is an American worldwide chemical company involved in the titanium products industry with approximately 6,500 employees. Following its acquisition of the mineral sands business formerly belonging to South Africa's Exxaro Resources, Tronox is the largest fully integrated seller and marketer of titanium dioxide (TiO2) pigment, which provides brightness to applications such as coatings, plastics and paper. Tronox mines titanium-bearing mineral sands and operates upgrading faciliti...
STUB vs TROX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $468.1M | $730.0M |
| Net Profit | $-1.3B | $-176.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | 5.3% |
| Operating Margin | -292.3% | -15.6% |
| Net Margin | -276.6% | -24.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 7.9% | 8.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | -3821.6% | -486.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-4.27 | $-1.11 |
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 | — | $730.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $468.1M | $699.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $731.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $738.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $676.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $433.8M | $804.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $820.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $774.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-176.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.3B | $-99.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-84.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-111.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-30.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-33.0M | $-25.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $16.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-9.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 7.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 10.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 13.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 17.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 15.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 18.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 15.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | -15.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -292.3% | -6.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -4.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -8.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.8% | 6.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 5.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | -24.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | -276.6% | -14.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -11.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -15.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -4.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | -7.6% | -3.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -1.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-1.11 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-4.27 | $-0.63 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.53 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.70 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.19 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.15 | $-0.16 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.10 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-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 | $1.4B | $199.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.7B | $3.1B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.7B | $1.4B |
| Total Assets | $5.6B | $6.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.98× | 2.21× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $199.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $185.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $132.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $138.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $151.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $167.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $201.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $152.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.8B |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $815.9M | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.9B |
| Q4 25 | — | $6.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.6B | $6.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $6.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $6.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $6.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $6.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $6.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $6.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.21× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.98× | 2.01× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.67× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.64× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.57× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.45× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.47× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.48× |
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 | $181.4M | $121.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $180.3M | $53.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 38.5% | 7.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.2% | 9.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-281.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $121.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $181.4M | $-57.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $28.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-32.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $82.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $87.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $160.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-29.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | $53.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $180.3M | $-137.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-55.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-142.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-35.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-14.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $84.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-105.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 7.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 38.5% | -19.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -7.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -19.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -5.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -1.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 10.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -13.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.2% | 11.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 11.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 14.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 17.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 12.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 9.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 10.00× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
STUB
| Transaction Fees | $453.4M | 97% |
| Other | $14.7M | 3% |
TROX
| Ti O2 | $577.0M | 79% |
| Zircon | $78.0M | 11% |
| Idle Facility And Lower Of Cost Or Net Realizable Value Charges | $42.0M | 6% |
| Other | $20.0M | 3% |
| MGT | $13.0M | 2% |
