vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of PEABODY ENERGY CORP (BTU) and Core Natural Resources, Inc. (CNR), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Core Natural Resources, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.0B vs $1.0B, roughly 1.0× PEABODY ENERGY CORP). PEABODY ENERGY CORP runs the higher net margin — 1.2% vs -7.6%, a 8.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Core Natural Resources, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (81.8% vs -9.0%). Over the past eight quarters, Core Natural Resources, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (38.1% CAGR vs 1.9%).
Peabody Energy is an American coal mining company headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri. Its primary business consists of the mining, sale, and distribution of coal, which is purchased for use in electricity generation and steelmaking. Peabody also markets, brokers, and trades coal through offices in China, Australia, and the United States.
Arch Resources, previously known as Arch Coal, was an American coal mining and processing company. The company mined, processed, and marketed bituminous and sub-bituminous coal with low sulfur content in the United States. Arch Resources was the second-largest supplier of coal in the United States, behind Peabody Energy. As of 2011 the company supplied 15% of the domestic market. Demand came mainly from generators of electricity.
BTU vs CNR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.0B | $1.0B |
| Net Profit | $12.4M | $-79.0M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | 0.8% | -9.3% |
| Net Margin | 1.2% | -7.6% |
| Revenue YoY | -9.0% | 81.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -67.2% | -356.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.11 | $-1.51 |
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 | $1.0B | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $890.1M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $937.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $573.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $553.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0B | $490.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $983.6M | $546.7M |
| Q4 25 | $12.4M | $-79.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-70.1M | $31.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-27.6M | $-36.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $34.4M | $-69.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $37.8M | $30.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $101.3M | $95.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $199.4M | $58.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $39.6M | $101.9M |
| Q4 25 | 0.8% | -9.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -8.0% | -1.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -4.3% | -1.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.4% | -5.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.6% | 6.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.0% | 21.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.4% | 14.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.2% | 22.7% |
| Q4 25 | 1.2% | -7.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -6.9% | 3.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.1% | -3.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.7% | -6.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.4% | 5.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 9.3% | 17.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.1% | 11.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.0% | 18.6% |
| Q4 25 | $0.11 | $-1.51 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.58 | $0.61 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.23 | $-0.70 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.27 | $-1.38 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.25 | $1.04 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.74 | $3.22 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.42 | $1.96 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.29 | $3.39 |
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 | $575.3M | $432.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $321.2M | $354.2M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.5B | $3.7B |
| Total Assets | $5.8B | $6.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.09× | 0.10× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $575.3M | $432.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $603.3M | $444.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $585.9M | $413.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $696.5M | $388.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $700.4M | $460.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $772.9M | $331.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $621.7M | $216.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $855.7M | $172.6M |
| Q4 25 | $321.2M | $354.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $321.8M | $334.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $329.2M | $334.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $331.2M | $329.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $332.3M | $94.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $323.7M | $83.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $323.2M | $184.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $323.3M | $185.5M |
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | $3.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.5B | $3.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.6B | $3.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7B | $3.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.7B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.5B | $1.4B |
| Q4 25 | $5.8B | $6.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.7B | $6.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.8B | $6.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.8B | $6.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.0B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.9B | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.9B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.7B | $2.7B |
| Q4 25 | 0.09× | 0.10× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.09× | 0.09× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.09× | 0.09× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.09× | 0.08× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.09× | 0.06× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.09× | 0.05× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.09× | 0.13× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.09× | 0.13× |
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 | $68.6M | $107.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $26.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 2.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | 7.8% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 5.53× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $21.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $68.6M | $107.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $122.0M | $87.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.2M | $220.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $119.9M | $-109.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $119.8M | $121.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $359.9M | $161.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.8M | $116.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $119.0M | $77.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | $26.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $38.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $131.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-174.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $80.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $121.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $60.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $35.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 11.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -17.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 14.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 22.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 12.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 6.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 7.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 8.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 6.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 7.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 11.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 7.7% |
| Q4 25 | 5.53× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.78× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.49× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.17× | 3.94× | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.55× | 1.69× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.04× | 2.00× | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.01× | 0.76× |
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
BTU
| Seaborne Metallurgical Mining | $305.4M | 30% |
| Powder River Basin Mining | $300.3M | 29% |
| Seaborne Thermal Mining | $205.6M | 20% |
| Other | $182.1M | 18% |
| Thermal Coal | $28.9M | 3% |
CNR
| Other | $397.4M | 38% |
| Power Generation | $376.5M | 36% |
| PRB | $183.0M | 18% |
| Metallurgical | $42.0M | 4% |
| Industrial | $34.1M | 3% |
| Terminal Revenue | $6.4M | 1% |
| Other Revenue | $3.0M | 0% |