vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Coeur Mining, Inc. (CDE) and Vale S.A. (VALE), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Vale S.A. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($8.8B vs $674.8M, roughly 13.0× Coeur Mining, Inc.). Coeur Mining, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 31.9% vs 24.3%, a 7.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Coeur Mining, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (120.9% vs -11.3%).
Coeur Mining, Inc. is a precious metals mining company listed on the New York Stock exchange. It operates five mines located in North America. Coeur employs 2,200 people and in 2012 it was the world's 9th largest silver producer. In 2013 the company changed its name to Coeur Mining, Inc. from Coeur d'Alene Mines and moved its head office to Chicago, Illinois from Coeur d'Alene, Idaho.
Vale, formerly Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, is a Brazilian multinational corporation engaged in metals and mining and one of the largest logistics operators in Brazil. Vale is the largest producer of iron ore and nickel in the world. It also produces manganese, ferroalloys, copper, bauxite, potash, kaolin, and cobalt; as of 2014 the company operated nine hydroelectricity plants, and a large network of railroads, ships, and ports used to transport its products.
CDE vs VALE — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q2 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $674.8M | $8.8B |
| Net Profit | $215.0M | $2.1B |
| Gross Margin | — | 30.9% |
| Operating Margin | 48.6% | 22.8% |
| Net Margin | 31.9% | 24.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 120.9% | -11.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 467.9% | -22.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.37 | $0.50 |
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 | $674.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $554.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $480.6M | $8.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $360.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $305.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $313.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $222.0M | $9.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $213.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $215.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $266.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $70.7M | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $33.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $37.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $48.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4M | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $-29.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 30.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 36.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 48.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 31.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 29.1% | 22.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 17.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.5% | 39.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.6% | — |
| Q4 25 | 31.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 48.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.7% | 24.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.6% | 27.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -13.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | $0.37 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.41 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.11 | $0.50 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.11 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.12 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.00 | $0.65 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.08 | — |
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 | $553.6M | $5.5B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.3B | $40.5B |
| Total Assets | $4.7B | $90.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $553.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $266.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $111.6M | $5.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $77.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $55.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $76.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $74.1M | $6.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $67.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | $3.3B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8B | $40.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0B | $38.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.0B | — |
| Q4 25 | $4.7B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.5B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.2B | $90.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.1B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.2B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.1B | $86.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | — |
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 | $374.6M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $313.3M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 46.4% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 9.1% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.74× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $665.7M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $374.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $237.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $207.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $67.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $63.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $111.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-15.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $313.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $188.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $146.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $69.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-36.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-58.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | 46.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 30.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -16.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -27.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | 9.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 13.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 19.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.74× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.89× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.93× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.03× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.69× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.28× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.69× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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.
