vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Beeline Holdings, Inc. (BLNE) and Cable One, Inc. (CABO), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Cable One, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($363.7M vs $1.9M, roughly 193.8× Beeline Holdings, Inc.). Over the past eight quarters, Cable One, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (-5.2% CAGR vs -33.0%).
Beeline（比附，品牌名билайн）是一个移动网络运营商品牌，业务覆盖俄罗斯、哈萨克斯坦、吉尔吉斯斯坦与乌兹别克斯坦，分别隶属于VimpelCom股份公司与VEON集团。该品牌是俄罗斯第四大移动运营商，主要竞争对手包括MTS、MegaFon和T2。
Cable One, Inc.是美国一家宽带通信服务商，以Sparklight为品牌面向美国24个州的110万个人及商业客户提供有线电视、互联网与电话服务。该公司还拥有Fidelity Communications品牌，在阿肯色、路易斯安那、密苏里、俄克拉荷马与德克萨斯提供同类通信服务，其总部坐落于亚利桑那州凤凰城。
BLNE vs CABO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.9M | $363.7M |
| Net Profit | $-8.4M | — |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -418.4% | 25.2% |
| Net Margin | -445.0% | — |
| Revenue YoY | — | -6.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -16.1% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-0.49 |
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 | $1.9M | $363.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.3M | $376.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7M | $381.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8M | $380.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $387.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $760.0K | $393.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.0M | $394.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.4M | $404.3M |
| Q4 25 | $-8.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-3.9M | $86.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-4.1M | $-438.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-6.8M | $2.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.4M | $44.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.5M | $38.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.3M | $37.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | -418.4% | 25.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -120.9% | 25.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -229.0% | -128.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -268.7% | 25.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 26.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -57.2% | 28.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -11.9% | 27.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -19.1% | 29.6% |
| Q4 25 | -445.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -167.2% | 23.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -237.3% | -114.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -372.4% | 0.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -178.8% | 11.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | -50.4% | 9.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | -53.6% | 9.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.49 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.20 | $14.52 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.64 | $-77.70 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.46 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-18.05 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-6.60 | $7.58 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.74 | $6.58 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.78 | $6.46 |
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 | $3.1M | $152.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $2.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $53.6M | $1.4B |
| Total Assets | $70.2M | $5.6B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 1.81× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $3.1M | $152.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3M | $166.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.3M | $152.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.5M | $149.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $153.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $310.0K | $226.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $420.0K | $201.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $147.0K | $210.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | $2.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.2M | $3.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.1M | $3.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.1M | $3.6B |
| Q4 25 | $53.6M | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $51.7M | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $54.6M | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $47.1M | $1.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.5M | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.9M | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $-476.0K | $1.9B |
| Q4 25 | $70.2M | $5.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $63.2M | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $68.6M | $5.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $63.8M | $6.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $6.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $16.2M | $6.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $16.6M | $6.7B | ||
| Q1 24 | $17.0M | $6.7B |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.81× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.88× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.16× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.66× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.99× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.84× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.87× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.93× |
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 | $-10.0M | $145.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $71.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 19.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | 20.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $278.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $-10.0M | $145.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-5.8M | $156.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-4.1M | $144.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.5M | $116.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $167.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-652.0K | $176.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-872.0K | $155.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-82.0K | $164.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $71.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $84.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $76.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $45.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $95.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $99.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $84.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $98.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | 19.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 22.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 20.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 11.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 24.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 25.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 21.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 24.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | 20.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 19.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 17.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 18.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 18.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 19.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 18.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 16.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.81× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 44.62× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.99× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.08× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 4.41× |
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.
