Sector Alpha Week of 2026-07-28
20-quarter listed-company comparison

Thermal Coal Stocks

Thermal Coal: Core Natural Resources, Inc. owns the largest revenue base AND the fastest current growth.

The industry itself · before any single company

How has Thermal Coal moved against S&P 500?

The line below covers 5.2 years. Over the most recent two of them this industry is 23% behind S&P 500. Earnings across its companies fell 79% on average over the last four reported quarters.

ASLEEP · 1y +0.1%⚠Price down, no fundamental support0 of 5 companies ahead of S&P 500 by 5% or more over three months

RS — · 1/5 >200d (+1) · 0/5 lead (+0) · EPS 0/5↑

2005001000202620252024202320222021 1064348 TRAILING 12-MONTH EPS · 100 AT THE START0100256Mar 22Sep 22Mar 23Sep 23Mar 24Sep 24Mar 25Sep 25Mar 26Mar 2022 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 100, against 100 at the start · no comparable year yet · 3 reportingJun 2022 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 158, against 100 at the start · no comparable year yet · 3 reportingSep 2022 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 174, against 100 at the start · no comparable year yet · 3 reportingDec 2022 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 256, against 100 at the start · up 200.0% on a year ago · 4 reportingMar 2023 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 189, against 100 at the start · up 88.7% on a year ago · 3 reportingJun 2023 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 178, against 100 at the start · up 51.1% on a year ago · 3 reportingSep 2023 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 167, against 100 at the start · down 4.8% on a year ago · 3 reportingDec 2023 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 194, against 100 at the start · down 37.1% on a year ago · 4 reportingMar 2024 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 148, against 100 at the start · down 41.1% on a year ago · 3 reportingJun 2024 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 160, against 100 at the start · down 46.8% on a year ago · 3 reportingSep 2024 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 157, against 100 at the start · down 40.7% on a year ago · 3 reportingDec 2024 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 88, against 100 at the start · down 48.2% on a year ago · 4 reportingMar 2025 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 128, against 100 at the start · down 24.6% on a year ago · 4 reportingJun 2025 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 59, against 100 at the start · down 73.0% on a year ago · 3 reportingSep 2025 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 54, against 100 at the start · down 100.0% on a year ago · 3 reportingDec 2025 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 86, against 100 at the start · down 74.2% on a year ago · 4 reportingMar 2026 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 38, against 100 at the start · down 69.0% on a year ago · 4 reportingNot reported yet — earnings trail price by a quarter or two38 · Mar 26No earnings on file this far back — the price series reaches further than the filings do
2005001000202620252024202320222021 1064348 TRAILING 12-MONTH EPS · 100 AT THE START0100256Mar 22Mar 23Mar 24Mar 25Mar 26Mar 2022 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 100, against 100 at the start · no comparable year yet · 3 reportingJun 2022 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 158, against 100 at the start · no comparable year yet · 3 reportingSep 2022 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 174, against 100 at the start · no comparable year yet · 3 reportingDec 2022 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 256, against 100 at the start · up 200.0% on a year ago · 4 reportingMar 2023 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 189, against 100 at the start · up 88.7% on a year ago · 3 reportingJun 2023 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 178, against 100 at the start · up 51.1% on a year ago · 3 reportingSep 2023 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 167, against 100 at the start · down 4.8% on a year ago · 3 reportingDec 2023 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 194, against 100 at the start · down 37.1% on a year ago · 4 reportingMar 2024 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 148, against 100 at the start · down 41.1% on a year ago · 3 reportingJun 2024 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 160, against 100 at the start · down 46.8% on a year ago · 3 reportingSep 2024 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 157, against 100 at the start · down 40.7% on a year ago · 3 reportingDec 2024 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 88, against 100 at the start · down 48.2% on a year ago · 4 reportingMar 2025 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 128, against 100 at the start · down 24.6% on a year ago · 4 reportingJun 2025 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 59, against 100 at the start · down 73.0% on a year ago · 3 reportingSep 2025 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 54, against 100 at the start · down 100.0% on a year ago · 3 reportingDec 2025 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 86, against 100 at the start · down 74.2% on a year ago · 4 reportingMar 2026 · trailing 12-month earnings per share at 38, against 100 at the start · down 69.0% on a year ago · 4 reportingNot reported yet — earnings trail price by a quarter or two38No earnings on file this far back — the price series reaches further than the filings do
Thermal Coal, equal-weighted, based at 200 S&P 500, same base, same start trailing 12-month earnings per share rising falling

Both lines start at 200 in the same week, so the distance between them is the whole story: the industry line is an equal-weighted index of its 5 companies. The bars underneath are trailing 12-month earnings per share, one bar per reported quarter, each member rebased to 100 at the start and the industry taking the median — so a price line pulling away from flat bars is a re-rating, not earnings. A bar turns red when that figure is lower than the quarter before. Rules are fixed and applied identically everywhere on this site: ahead by 5% or more over three months, or behind by 20% or more over a year while earnings grew 20% or more. Hover any point to read both values and the gap. This is a description of what the numbers did, not advice.

Sector relative strength · before individual stocks

Is Thermal Coal outperforming S&P 500?

Thermal Coal has outperformed S&P 500 by 0.1% over the last 52 weeks. Over 13 weeks the gap is a shortfall of 10.1%. 0 of 5 covered companies currently beat the S&P 500 on Mansfield relative strength, so leadership inside the sector is selective. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. is the strongest against the sector itself at +8.2%.

-10.1%Sector vs S&P 500 · 13 weeks
+0.1%Sector vs S&P 500 · 52 weeks
0/5Stocks leading S&P 500
2/5Stocks leading sector

Sector metric: — as of latest available · unclassified · direction unavailable.

The central tension: current leadership is concentrated, so durability matters more than rank.

Start with scale. Then earnings trajectory. Then business quality. Only after those three agree should price leadership carry much weight.

Bottom line

Thermal Coal has outperformed S&P 500 by 0.1% over 52 weeks and 10.1% over 13 weeks. 0 of 5 covered companies beat the S&P 500 on Mansfield relative strength, while 2 of 5 beat the sector itself. Core Natural Resources, Inc. leads with revenue of $4,231 million, based on 4 of 5 comparable companies through Mar 2026.

Is the Thermal Coal sector outperforming S&P 500?

Thermal Coal has outperformed S&P 500 by 0.1% over 52 weeks and 10.1% over 13 weeks. 0 of 5 covered companies beat the S&P 500 on Mansfield relative strength, while 2 of 5 beat the sector itself.

Which Thermal Coal company is largest by revenue?

Core Natural Resources, Inc. leads with revenue of $4,231 million, based on 4 of 5 comparable companies through Mar 2026.

Which Thermal Coal company is growing fastest?

Core Natural Resources, Inc. has the fastest current revenue growth at 60.6%, across 4 of 5 comparable companies.

Which Thermal Coal company has the strongest 4-Factor Sector Score?

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ranks first at 60/100 with 52% evidence confidence. The score prioritizes research; it is not a buy recommendation.

Which Thermal Coal company reports the most CAPEX?

Peabody Energy Corporation reports the largest latest CAPEX at $123 million, with 5 of 5 companies comparable.

Which Thermal Coal company has the least gross debt?

Core Natural Resources, Inc. has the lowest comparable gross debt at $43 million. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. has the highest at $508 million.

Which Thermal Coal company has the lowest comparable PEG?

NACCO Industries, Inc. has the lowest comparable Guarded PEG at 0.14, among 2 of 5 companies that pass the metric’s comparability rules.

How much history does this Thermal Coal comparison include?

The page compares up to 20 reported quarters per company for fundamentals, CAPEX, debt and valuation, ending Mar 2026. Missing observations remain blank rather than being estimated.

How is the 4-Factor Sector Score calculated?

The four visible contributions add directly: growth and earnings up to 35 points, capital efficiency up to 25, valuation up to 20, and relative strength up to 20. Missing or stale evidence moves only the affected contribution toward neutral.

Companies
5
complete canonical membership
Combined market value
$11.9B
Core Natural Resources, Inc.
Revenue growing
2/4
positive TTM year-on-year growth
Beating S&P 500
0/5
positive Mansfield relative strength
Global company selection
00 · research priority, made explicit

4-Factor Sector Score

An additive sector-relative research score. The four displayed point contributions always equal the total: Growth & earnings (35), Capital efficiency (25), Valuation (20), and Relative strength (20). Missing or stale evidence is absorbed inside the affected factor, never applied as a hidden adjustment.

Growth & earnings · 35%Capital efficiency · 25%Valuation · 20%Relative strength · 20%
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. has the strongest current balance of earnings trajectory, business quality, valuation and price confirmation, with 52% evidence confidence.
NACCO Industries, Inc. looks inexpensive relative to peers or its own history, but its earnings trajectory has not yet earned the valuation signal.

Missing observations are not scored as bad. Their missing weight lowers confidence and pulls the final score toward neutral. PEG is guarded: positive earnings, positive 5–60% three-year EPS growth, and a positive P/E are required.

1. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

60.0/100 · Thin evidence · provisional · 52% evidence

Exact sum: 18.4 + 11.5 + 11.5 + 18.6 = 60

Decision use: Fill the missing evidence before acting; the ranking is deliberately pulled toward neutral.

18.4/35Growth & earnings

Revenue — · PAT — · OPM change -13.2 pp

26% evidence

11.5/25Capital efficiency

ROCE 1.7% · debt/equity 0.28×

80% evidence

11.5/20Valuation

P/E 9.7× · PEG —

15% evidence

18.6/20Relative strength

RS sector 8.2% · RS bench -2.9% · 1Y -2.6%

100% evidence

2. NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

54.8/100 · Mixed-positive evidence · 80% evidence

Exact sum: 15.6 + 12.2 + 14.3 + 12.7 = 54.8

Decision use: Cheap but unconfirmed: require improving earnings before treating the valuation as an opportunity.

15.6/35Growth & earnings

Revenue 10% · PAT -40% · OPM change 5.8 pp

95% evidence

12.2/25Capital efficiency

ROCE 1.8% · debt/equity 0.31×

80% evidence

14.3/20Valuation

P/E 18.1× · PEG 0.14

65% evidence

12.7/20Relative strength

RS sector 4.1% · RS bench -6.8% · 1Y 30.3%

70% evidence

3. Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

53.6/100 · Mixed-positive evidence · 68% evidence

Exact sum: 25.8 + 11 + 8.5 + 8.3 = 53.6

Decision use: Balanced evidence: keep at normal research priority and require another comparable period before raising conviction.

25.8/35Growth & earnings

Revenue 60.6% · PAT -154.3% · OPM change 8.4 pp

71% evidence

11.0/25Capital efficiency

ROCE 0.2% · debt/equity 0.01×

80% evidence

8.5/20Valuation

P/E 32× · PEG —

15% evidence

8.3/20Relative strength

RS sector -4.1% · RS bench -14.4% · 1Y 9.5%

100% evidence

4. Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

45.3/100 · Mixed-negative evidence · 80% evidence

Exact sum: 6.7 + 18.2 + 15 + 5.4 = 45.3

Decision use: Cheap but unconfirmed: require improving earnings before treating the valuation as an opportunity.

6.7/35Growth & earnings

Revenue -16.1% · PAT -30.9% · OPM change -8.2 pp

95% evidence

18.2/25Capital efficiency

ROCE 3.8% · debt/equity 0.1×

80% evidence

15.0/20Valuation

P/E 14.2× · PEG 0.14

65% evidence

5.4/20Relative strength

RS sector -4.7% · RS bench -14.7% · 1Y -3.1%

70% evidence

5. Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

24.6/100 · Adverse evidence · 70% evidence

Exact sum: 4.1 + 6.7 + 10.8 + 3 = 24.6

Decision use: Balanced evidence: keep at normal research priority and require another comparable period before raising conviction.

4.1/35Growth & earnings

Revenue -7% · PAT -126.5% · OPM change -7.9 pp

95% evidence

6.7/25Capital efficiency

ROCE -0.9% · debt/equity 0.12×

80% evidence

10.8/20Valuation

P/E 12.9× · PEG —

15% evidence

3.0/20Relative strength

RS sector -12.2% · RS bench -22.5% · 1Y 44.6%

70% evidence

01 · compare level, then change

Revenue Scale & Growth Durability

Core Natural Resources, Inc. has the highest Revenue among the 5 Thermal Coal companies compared here, at $4,231 million. Peabody Energy Corporation is next at $3,897 million. The same company also holds the highest Revenue growth, at 60.6%. 4 of 5 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.

What the numbers say: Core Natural Resources, Inc. is the scale leader at $4,231 million, 8.6% ahead of Peabody Energy Corporation. Core Natural Resources, Inc.'s growth is 60.6% from a $4,231 million base, with 20 reported observations in the 20-quarter window. Treat the growth leader as an acceleration candidate, not as equally proven scale.

LeaderCore Natural Resources, Inc. · $4,231 million
Gap8.6% versus #2 · Peabody Energy Corporation
Persistence5/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage4/5 companies · 87 observations

Investor read: Core Natural Resources, Inc. is the scale benchmark; Core Natural Resources, Inc. is the acceleration watch. Promote the challenger only if growth persists and converts into margin and returns.

This conclusion weakens if: Core Natural Resources, Inc.'s growth falls below Core Natural Resources, Inc.'s for two consecutive comparable reports while operating margin also compresses.

Revenue is compared on a common reported-currency basis. Growth is year-on-year, so seasonality does not masquerade as progress.
Revenuelargest
1Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$4.2B
2Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$3.9B
3NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$275M
4Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$193M
Revenue growthfastest growers
1Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR61%
2NACCO Industries, Inc. NC10%
3Peabody Energy Corporation BTU-7.0%
4Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP-16%
Revenue · company comparison
4/5 level · 4/5 change

Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.

All-company data · latest reported quarter

Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.

CompanyRevenueRevenue growthReported
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$1.1B6.6%Mar 2026
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$973M3.8%Mar 2026
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP$516M-4.4%Mar 2026
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$63M-4.6%Mar 2026
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$47M-16%Mar 2026
Full 20-quarter history · every available company

Revenue · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
$473M
—
—
—
$704M
—
—
—
$625M
—
—
—
$590M
$540M
—
—
$536M
$516M

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

$287M
$149M
$481M
$359M
$545M
$562M
$637M
$689M
$661M
$570M
$587M
$547M
$491M
$553M
$574M
$1.0B
$1.1B
$1.0B
$1.0B
$1.1B

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

$46M
$52M
$49M
$55M
$61M
$62M
$64M
$50M
$61M
$47M
$57M
$53M
$52M
$62M
$70M
$66M
$68M
$77M
$67M
$63M

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

$36M
$50M
$73M
$75M
$85M
$87M
$81M
$80M
$64M
$73M
$76M
$71M
$57M
$52M
$65M
$56M
$47M
$51M
$48M
$47M

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

$723M
$679M
$1.3B
$691M
$1.3B
$1.3B
$1.6B
$1.4B
$1.3B
$1.1B
$1.2B
$984M
$1.0B
$1.1B
$1.1B
$937M
$890M
$1.0B
$1.0B
$973M

Revenue growth · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
29%
—
—
—
49%
—
—
—
-11%
—
—
—
-5.6%
—
—
—
-9.2%
-4.4%

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
—
—
—
90%
277%
32%
92%
21%
1.4%
-7.9%
-21%
-26%
-3.0%
-2.2%
86%
124%
81%
82%
6.6%

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
—
—
—
33%
19%
31%
-9.1%
0.0%
-24%
-11%
6.0%
-15%
32%
23%
25%
31%
24%
-4.3%
-4.6%

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
—
—
—
136%
74%
11%
6.7%
-25%
-16%
-6.2%
-11%
-11%
-29%
-14%
-21%
-18%
-1.9%
-26%
-16%

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

—
—
—
—
83%
98%
29%
97%
-4.0%
-20%
-24%
-28%
-18%
0.8%
-9.1%
-4.8%
-15%
-7.0%
-9.0%
3.8%
02 · compare level, then change

Operating Economics & Margin Trend

Natural Resource Partners L.P. has the highest OPM among the 5 Thermal Coal companies compared here, at 60.2%. NACCO Industries, Inc. is next at 17.5%. Core Natural Resources, Inc. has the highest Margin change at +8.4 percentage points, so level and change sit with different companies. 5 of 5 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.

What the numbers say: Natural Resource Partners L.P. leads opm at 60.2%; Core Natural Resources, Inc. leads margin change at +8.4 percentage points.

LeaderNatural Resource Partners L.P. · 60.2%
Gap244% versus #2 · NACCO Industries, Inc.
Persistence3/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage5/5 companies · 87 observations

Investor read: Natural Resource Partners L.P. sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.

This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current margin change signal.

Operating margin compares operating profit with revenue. Improvement is measured in percentage points, not percentage growth.
OPMhighest
1Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP60%
2NACCO Industries, Inc. NC18%
3Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP4.2%
4Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR1.2%
5Peabody Energy Corporation BTU-4.5%
Margin changefastest expanders
1Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR+8.4 pp
2NACCO Industries, Inc. NC+5.8 pp
3Peabody Energy Corporation BTU−7.9 pp
4Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP−8.2 pp
5Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP−13.2 pp
Operating margin · company comparison
5/5 level · 5/5 change

Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.

All-company data · latest reported quarter

Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.

CompanyOPMMargin changeReported
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP60%−8.2 ppMar 2026
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC18%+5.8 ppMar 2026
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP4.2%−13.2 ppMar 2026
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR1.2%+8.4 ppMar 2026
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU-4.5%−7.9 ppMar 2026
Full 20-quarter history · every available company

OPM · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
13%
—
—
—
31%
—
—
—
19%
—
—
—
2.6%
17%
—
—
18%
4.2%

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

4.0%
-93%
37%
2.4%
30%
36%
39%
41%
32%
23%
86%
19%
14%
18%
28%
-7.2%
-0.8%
-0.8%
-15%
1.2%

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

19%
53%
22%
27%
48%
16%
25%
3.6%
2.9%
-14%
-119%
8.9%
14%
32%
5.5%
12%
-0.1%
8.8%
11%
18%

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

62%
65%
75%
78%
75%
77%
68%
79%
73%
74%
68%
76%
74%
66%
70%
68%
71%
67%
70%
60%

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

-0.6%
-6.5%
41%
-10%
34%
31%
36%
30%
21%
15%
20%
5.2%
22%
11%
3.6%
3.4%
-4.3%
-8.0%
0.8%
-4.5%

Margin change · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
+0.5 pp
—
—
—
+18.3 pp
—
—
—
−12.7 pp
—
—
—
−15.9 pp
—
—
—
+15.6 pp
−13.2 pp

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
—
—
—
+26.1 pp
+128.9 pp
+2.1 pp
+38.8 pp
+2.1 pp
−13.8 pp
+46.8 pp
−21.8 pp
−17.9 pp
−4.2 pp
−58.2 pp
−26.6 pp
−15.1 pp
−19.2 pp
−43.0 pp
+8.4 pp

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
—
—
—
+29.5 pp
−37.4 pp
+2.5 pp
−23.6 pp
−45.5 pp
−29.4 pp
−143.3 pp
+5.3 pp
+11.2 pp
+45.4 pp
+124.3 pp
+2.8 pp
−14.2 pp
−23.1 pp
+5.8 pp
+5.8 pp

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
—
—
—
+12.9 pp
+12.3 pp
−7.0 pp
+0.5 pp
−2.4 pp
−2.6 pp
+0.7 pp
−2.2 pp
+0.7 pp
−8.0 pp
+1.8 pp
−8.0 pp
−2.4 pp
+0.1 pp
−0.1 pp
−8.2 pp

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

—
—
—
—
+34.6 pp
+37.8 pp
−5.4 pp
+39.9 pp
−13.4 pp
−16.6 pp
−15.5 pp
−24.5 pp
+1.8 pp
−3.7 pp
−16.7 pp
−1.8 pp
−26.7 pp
−19.0 pp
−2.8 pp
−7.9 pp
03 · compare level, then change

Profit Scale & Acceleration

Natural Resource Partners L.P. has the highest Net profit among the 5 Thermal Coal companies compared here, at $116 million. NACCO Industries, Inc. is next at $21 million. The same company also holds the highest Profit growth, at -30.9%. 4 of 5 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.

What the numbers say: Natural Resource Partners L.P. leads with $116 million of TTM profit, 452.4% above NACCO Industries, Inc.. Natural Resource Partners L.P. shows -30.9% growth from a $116 million profit base. Compare the size of the base and persistence before ranking acceleration above profit scale.

LeaderNatural Resource Partners L.P. · $116 million
Gap452.4% versus #2 · NACCO Industries, Inc.
Persistence0/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage4/5 companies · 87 observations

Investor read: Natural Resource Partners L.P. sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.

This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current profit growth signal.

Net profit is the residual after operating costs, interest and tax. Growth off a loss or near-zero base is excluded from the fastest-grower rank.
Net profitlargest
1Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$116M
2NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$21M
3Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$-63M
4Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$-106M
Profit growthfastest growers
1Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP-31%
2NACCO Industries, Inc. NC-40%
3Peabody Energy Corporation BTU-127%
Net profit · company comparison
4/5 level · 3/5 change

Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.

All-company data · latest reported quarter

Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.

CompanyNet profitProfit growthReported
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$21M-355%Mar 2026
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$20M-50%Mar 2026
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP$11M-86%Mar 2026
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$9M80%Mar 2026
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$-25M-166%Mar 2026
Full 20-quarter history · every available company

Net profit · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
$52M
—
—
—
$218M
—
—
—
$117M
—
—
—
$18M
$76M
—
—
$84M
$11M

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

$4M
$-114M
$117M
$-4M
$126M
$152M
$193M
$230M
$168M
$101M
$157M
$102M
$58M
$96M
$31M
$-69M
$-37M
$32M
$-79M
$21M

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

$7M
$25M
$8M
$13M
$37M
$11M
$14M
$6M
$3M
$-4M
$-44M
$5M
$6M
$16M
$8M
$5M
$3M
$13M
$-4M
$9M

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

$15M
$29M
$56M
$64M
$67M
$75M
$63M
$79M
$70M
$64M
$65M
$56M
$46M
$39M
$43M
$40M
$34M
$31M
$31M
$20M

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

$-23M
$-60M
$508M
$-120M
$411M
$384M
$642M
$284M
$204M
$129M
$199M
$46M
$211M
$113M
$38M
$38M
$-26M
$-67M
$12M
$-25M

Profit growth · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
49%
—
—
—
319%
—
—
—
-46%
—
—
—
-85%
—
—
—
367%
-86%

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
—
—
—
3,050%
—
65%
—
33%
-34%
-19%
-56%
-65%
-5.0%
-80%
-168%
-164%
-67%
-355%
—

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
—
—
—
429%
-56%
75%
-54%
-92%
-136%
-414%
-17%
100%
—
—
0.0%
-50%
-19%
-150%
80%

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
—
—
—
347%
159%
13%
23%
4.5%
-15%
3.2%
-29%
-34%
-39%
-34%
-29%
-26%
-21%
-28%
-50%

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

—
—
—
—
—
—
26%
—
-50%
-66%
-69%
-84%
3.4%
-12%
-81%
-17%
-112%
-159%
-68%
-166%
04 · compare level, then change

Capacity Spending & Returns On It

Peabody Energy Corporation has the highest CAPEX among the 5 Thermal Coal companies compared here, at $123 million. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. is next at $92 million. NACCO Industries, Inc. has the highest CAPEX intensity at 52.4%, so level and change sit with different companies. 5 of 5 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.

What the numbers say: Peabody Energy Corporation reports $123 million of CAPEX; NACCO Industries, Inc. has the highest covered intensity at 52.4%. Coverage is only 5 of 5 companies and 64 reported observations, so this is partial evidence—not a complete sector rank.

LeaderPeabody Energy Corporation · $123 million
Gap33.7% versus #2 · Alliance Resource Partners, L.P.
Persistence8/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage5/5 companies · 64 observations

Investor read: Use the CAPEX rank as a diligence queue. Verify commissioning, utilization, cash conversion and post-investment ROCE before treating spend as value creation.

This conclusion weakens if: CAPEX rises without higher utilization, operating cash flow or incremental returns.

CAPEX is cash spent on property, plant, equipment and other reported capital assets. CAPEX intensity divides that spend by revenue; high intensity is a reinvestment signal, not proof that the reinvestment will earn attractive returns.
CAPEXlargest spenders
1Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$123M
2Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP$92M
3Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$73M
4NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$33M
5Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$0M
CAPEX intensityhighest reinvestment intensity
1NACCO Industries, Inc. NC52%
2Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP18%
3Peabody Energy Corporation BTU13%
4Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR6.7%
5Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP0.0%
Capital expenditure · company comparison
5/5 level · 5/5 change

Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.

All-company data · latest reported quarter

Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.

CompanyCAPEXCAPEX intensityReported
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$123M13%Mar 2026
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP$92M18%Mar 2026
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$73M6.7%Mar 2026
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$33M52%Mar 2026
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$0M0.0%Mar 2026
Full 20-quarter history · every available company

CAPEX · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
$93M
—
—
—
$92M

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

$44M
$46M
$29M
$37M
$39M
$58M
$37M
$34M
$42M
$42M
$50M
$42M
$55M
$39M
$41M
$65M
$89M
$49M
$81M
$73M

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

$11M
$19M
$4M
$5M
$20M
$17M
$1M
$8M
$6M
$24M
$8M
$14M
$8M
$8M
$24M
$9M
$3M
$22M
$14M
$33M

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
—
—
—
—
$0M
$0M
$0M
$0M
$0M
$0M
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

$36M
$29M
$49M
$37M
$36M
$40M
$111M
$57M
$70M
$68M
—
$68M
$113M
$92M
—
$109M
—
$109M
—
$123M

CAPEX intensity · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
17%
—
—
—
18%

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

15%
31%
6.0%
10%
7.2%
10%
5.8%
4.9%
6.4%
7.4%
8.5%
7.7%
11%
7.1%
7.1%
6.4%
8.1%
4.9%
7.8%
6.7%

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

24%
37%
8.2%
9.1%
33%
27%
1.6%
16%
9.8%
51%
14%
26%
15%
13%
34%
14%
4.4%
29%
21%
52%

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
—
—
—
—
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

5.0%
4.3%
3.9%
5.4%
2.7%
3.0%
6.8%
4.2%
5.5%
6.3%
—
6.9%
11%
8.5%
—
12%
—
11%
—
13%
Annual capital allocation · 5-year view
5/5 capacity base · 5/5 OCF · 5/5 CAPEX · 5/5 FCF

Capacity base is net fixed assets plus capital work in progress, straight off the reported balance sheet. It is not cash spent, so it answers a narrower question than CAPEX — but it is reported for companies whose cash-flow CAPEX is not published, which is why it leads here. Missing years remain blank; annual values are never relabelled as quarters.

Full annual capacity base, operating cash flow, CAPEX and free cash flow history

Capacity base · net fixed assets + CWIP · fiscal-year history

Operating cash flow · fiscal-year history

CAPEX · reported cash flow · fiscal-year history

Free cash flow · fiscal-year history

05 · compare level, then change

Debt Load & Balance-Sheet Headroom

Core Natural Resources, Inc. has the lowest Gross debt among the 5 Thermal Coal companies compared here, at $43 million. Natural Resource Partners L.P. is next at $60 million. The same company also holds the lowest Net debt, at $370 million net cash. 5 of 5 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.

What the numbers say: Core Natural Resources, Inc. has the clearest covered balance-sheet capacity with $370 million net cash and gross debt of $43 million. Absolute debt alone does not identify the strongest balance sheet because company scale differs; net debt and debt-to-equity carry more information.

LeaderCore Natural Resources, Inc. · $43 million
Gap28.3% versus #2 · Natural Resource Partners L.P.
Persistence7/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage5/5 companies · 91 observations

Investor read: Prioritize net-cash capacity and leverage relative to operating scale, not the smallest absolute rupee debt.

This conclusion weakens if: Net debt rises faster than revenue and profit for two consecutive reported periods.

Gross debt shows contractual borrowings. Net debt subtracts reported cash; a negative value means net cash. Lower debt can create capacity, but should be read against the scale and capital intensity of the business.
Gross debtlowest gross debt
1Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$43M
2Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$60M
3NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$134M
4Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$430M
5Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP$508M
Net debtlowest net debt
1Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$-370M
2Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$-63M
3Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$28M
4NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$81M
5Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP$479M
Debt and balance-sheet capacity · company comparison
5/5 level · 5/5 change

Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.

All-company data · latest reported quarter

Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.

CompanyGross debtNet debtReported
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP$508M$479MMar 2026
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$430M$-63MMar 2026
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$134M$81MMar 2026
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$60M$28MMar 2026
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$43M$-370MMar 2026
Full 20-quarter history · every available company

Gross debt · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
$451M
$451M
—
—
$434M
$434M
—
—
$351M
$351M
—
—
$487M
$487M
—
—
$465M
$465M
$508M

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

$726M
$706M
$674M
$642M
$529M
$475M
$404M
$306M
$251M
$221M
$212M
$208M
$206M
$202M
$208M
$367M
$391M
$418M
$452M
$43M

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

$42M
$27M
$30M
$35M
$28M
$27M
$27M
$28M
$31M
$31M
$45M
$58M
$69M
$78M
$109M
$104M
$104M
$88M
$109M
$134M

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

$453M
$454M
$434M
$417M
$298M
$239M
$168M
$173M
$182M
$208M
$155M
$189M
$210M
$197M
$142M
$139M
$101M
$69M
$33M
$60M

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

$1.5B
$1.4B
$1.2B
$1.1B
$1.1B
$883M
$345M
$343M
$346M
$355M
$382M
$399M
$426M
$433M
$435M
$402M
$394M
$408M
$424M
$430M

Net debt · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
$329M
$329M
—
—
$138M
$138M
—
—
$291M
$291M
—
—
$350M
$350M
—
—
$394M
$394M
$479M

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

$579M
$544M
$524M
$419M
$267M
$206M
$131M
$38M
$-39M
$-28M
$-69M
$-47M
$-93M
$-214M
$-252M
$-21M
$-22M
$-27M
$20M
$-370M

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

$-43M
$-61M
$-56M
$-47M
$-69M
$-66M
$-84M
$-82M
$-86M
$-97M
$-40M
$-4M
$7M
$15M
$36M
$42M
$55M
$35M
$59M
$81M

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

$355M
$335M
$298M
$281M
$239M
$178M
$129M
$155M
$171M
$190M
$143M
$178M
$178M
$166M
$112M
$108M
$71M
$38M
$3M
$28M

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

$905M
$773M
$211M
$300M
$-50M
$-472M
$-962M
$-549M
$-735M
$-634M
$-587M
$-457M
$-196M
$-340M
$-265M
$-295M
$-192M
$-195M
$-151M
$-63M
06 · compare level, then change

Return On Capital Employed

Natural Resource Partners L.P. has the highest ROCE among the 5 Thermal Coal companies compared here, at 3.8%. NACCO Industries, Inc. is next at 1.8%. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. has the highest ROCE change at +3.1 percentage points, so level and change sit with different companies. 5 of 5 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.

What the numbers say: Natural Resource Partners L.P. leads ROCE at 3.8%, 2 percentage points above NACCO Industries, Inc.. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. has the strongest latest improvement at +3.1 percentage points. Read the leader beside the density of its reported history: a sparse high return is a candidate; a repeated high return is evidence of durability.

LeaderNatural Resource Partners L.P. · 3.8%
Gap111.1% versus #2 · NACCO Industries, Inc.
Persistence0/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage5/5 companies · 87 observations

Investor read: Natural Resource Partners L.P. sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.

This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current roce change signal.

ROCE asks how much operating return the business earns on the capital employed. Direction matters, but a single exceptional year should not be mistaken for durability.
ROCEhighest
1Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP3.8%
2NACCO Industries, Inc. NC1.8%
3Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP1.7%
4Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR0.2%
5Peabody Energy Corporation BTU-0.9%
ROCE changefastest improvers
1Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP+3.1 pp
2Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR+2.1 pp
3NACCO Industries, Inc. NC+0.3 pp
4Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP−1.3 pp
5Peabody Energy Corporation BTU−1.5 pp
Return on capital · company comparison
5/5 level · 5/5 change

Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.

All-company data · latest reported quarter

Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.

CompanyROCEROCE changeReported
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP3.8%−1.3 ppMar 2026
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC1.8%+0.3 ppMar 2026
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP1.7%+3.1 ppMar 2026
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR0.2%+2.1 ppMar 2026
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU-0.9%−1.5 ppMar 2026
Full 20-quarter history · every available company

ROCE · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
0.0%
3.1%
—
—
0.0%
9.9%
—
—
0.0%
4.6%
—
—
0.0%
0.6%
—
—
0.0%
3.7%
1.7%

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
-6.5%
8.3%
0.4%
7.6%
9.5%
11%
13%
9.7%
5.8%
23%
4.7%
3.1%
4.5%
6.9%
-1.9%
-0.2%
-0.2%
-4.1%
0.2%

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
6.3%
2.4%
3.3%
6.3%
2.0%
3.2%
0.4%
0.3%
-1.2%
-14%
0.9%
1.5%
3.8%
0.7%
1.5%
0.0%
1.2%
1.3%
1.8%

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
3.7%
6.2%
6.7%
7.6%
8.2%
6.4%
7.5%
5.9%
7.1%
6.7%
7.1%
5.5%
4.6%
6.1%
5.1%
4.5%
4.6%
4.6%
3.8%

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

—
-1.4%
13%
-1.8%
11%
11%
13%
8.9%
5.6%
3.5%
5.2%
1.0%
4.7%
2.4%
0.8%
0.6%
-0.8%
-1.6%
0.2%
-0.9%

ROCE change · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
—
—
—
0.0 pp
+6.8 pp
—
—
0.0 pp
−5.3 pp
—
—
0.0 pp
−4.0 pp
—
—
0.0 pp
+3.1 pp
—

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
—
—
—
—
+16.0 pp
+3.1 pp
+12.7 pp
+2.1 pp
−3.7 pp
+11.1 pp
−8.4 pp
−6.6 pp
−1.3 pp
−15.6 pp
−6.6 pp
−3.3 pp
−4.7 pp
−11.0 pp
+2.1 pp

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
—
—
—
—
−4.3 pp
+0.8 pp
−2.9 pp
−6.0 pp
−3.2 pp
−16.8 pp
+0.5 pp
+1.2 pp
+5.0 pp
+14.3 pp
+0.6 pp
−1.5 pp
−2.6 pp
+0.6 pp
+0.3 pp

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
—
—
—
—
+4.5 pp
+0.2 pp
+0.8 pp
−1.7 pp
−1.1 pp
+0.3 pp
−0.4 pp
−0.4 pp
−2.5 pp
−0.6 pp
−2.0 pp
−1.0 pp
0.0 pp
−1.5 pp
−1.3 pp

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

—
—
—
—
—
+12.3 pp
+0.2 pp
+10.7 pp
−5.7 pp
−7.4 pp
−8.2 pp
−7.9 pp
−0.9 pp
−1.1 pp
−4.4 pp
−0.4 pp
−5.5 pp
−4.0 pp
−0.6 pp
−1.5 pp
07 · compare level, then change

Valuation Against Growth & Quality

NACCO Industries, Inc. has the lowest Guarded PEG among the 5 Thermal Coal companies compared here, at 0.14×. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. has the lowest P/E at 9.68×, so level and change sit with different companies. 2 of 5 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.

What the numbers say: NACCO Industries, Inc. has the lowest comparable Guarded PEG at 0.14×, 0% below Natural Resource Partners L.P.. Only 2 of 5 companies pass the guard, so no broad “cheapest stock” conclusion is defensible unless the current multiple, own-history position and growth durability agree.

LeaderNACCO Industries, Inc. · 0.14×
Gap0% versus #2 · Natural Resource Partners L.P.
Persistence0/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage2/5 companies · 3 observations

Investor read: Treat valuation as permission to investigate, never as a standalone reason to buy.

This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current p/e signal.

PEG is shown only when earnings are positive and three-year EPS growth is between 5% and 60%. It is recomputed consistently as the trailing P/E divided by that growth rate — reported earnings, never an expected-earnings multiple. On Indian companies it is shown only where the two data sources reconciled. A missing PEG is more honest than a low-base fiction.
Guarded PEGlowest PEG
1NACCO Industries, Inc. NC0.1
2Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP0.1
P/Elowest P/E
1Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP9.7
2Peabody Energy Corporation BTU12.9
3Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP14.2
4NACCO Industries, Inc. NC18.1
5Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR32.0
Valuation · company comparison
2/5 level · 5/5 change

Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.

All-company data · latest reported quarter

Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.

CompanyGuarded PEGP/EReported
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP0.114.2Mar 2026
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC0.118.1Mar 2026
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR0.132.0Mar 2026
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP—9.7Mar 2026
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU—12.9Mar 2026
Full 20-quarter history · every available company

Guarded PEG · reported quarter history

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
0.1
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
0.1
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
0.1
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

P/E · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
9.3
—
—
—
4.6
—
—
—
4.4
—
—
—
9.5
—
—
—
9.7
—

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
—
23.7
—
14.5
5.9
5.0
3.0
3.2
5.3
5.1
5.1
7.6
7.7
11.1
15.9
32.0
—
—
—

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
6.1
5.4
5.5
3.4
5.1
3.8
4.0
7.9
14.4
—
—
—
—
6.6
7.3
10.4
10.8
20.9
18.1

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
10.4
7.0
5.9
3.8
3.5
4.1
3.9
4.1
6.6
7.1
6.8
6.7
7.9
9.8
10.0
9.0
9.6
10.4
14.2

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

—
—
3.4
10.2
4.1
3.1
3.2
2.5
2.4
3.5
4.9
6.8
5.8
7.0
7.8
5.0
12.9
—
—
—
08 · compare level, then change

Enterprise Value & Book Value

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. has the lowest EV/EBITDA among the 5 Thermal Coal companies compared here, at 4.96×. Core Natural Resources, Inc. is next at 10.2×. NACCO Industries, Inc. has the lowest P/BV at 0.9×, so level and change sit with different companies. 5 of 5 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.

What the numbers say: Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. leads ev/ebitda at 4.96×; NACCO Industries, Inc. leads p/bv at 0.9×.

LeaderAlliance Resource Partners, L.P. · 4.96×
Gap51.4% versus #2 · Core Natural Resources, Inc.
Persistence0/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage5/5 companies · 77 observations

Investor read: Treat valuation as permission to investigate, never as a standalone reason to buy.

This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current p/bv signal.

EV/EBITDA includes debt in enterprise value and is useful across different capital structures. P/BV prices the company against its own book. Both are market multiples on reported figures, not intrinsic-value estimates and not forecasts.
EV/EBITDAlowest EV/EBITDA
1Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP5.0
2Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR10.2
3Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP12.6
4Peabody Energy Corporation BTU16.3
5NACCO Industries, Inc. NC18.7
P/BVlowest P/BV
1NACCO Industries, Inc. NC0.9
2Peabody Energy Corporation BTU1.2
3Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR1.5
4Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP2.0
5Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP2.5
Enterprise and book valuation · company comparison
5/5 level · 5/5 change

Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.

All-company data · latest reported quarter

Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.

CompanyEV/EBITDAP/BVReported
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC18.70.9Mar 2026
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU16.31.2Mar 2026
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP12.62.5Mar 2026
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR10.21.5Mar 2026
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP5.02.0Mar 2026
Full 20-quarter history · every available company

EV/EBITDA · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
—
4.1
—
—
—
2.9
—
—
—
3.2
—
—
—
5.5
—
—
—
5.0
—

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
5.3
4.4
6.2
4.5
3.1
2.8
1.8
1.8
2.9
2.9
1.1
1.4
1.4
4.4
7.4
6.3
7.5
12.2
10.2

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
4.2
2.6
3.9
2.5
4.3
2.0
3.3
6.0
12.9
—
—
—
—
4.2
7.6
12.3
19.1
9.0
18.7

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
7.4
6.2
5.3
3.8
3.4
3.7
3.4
3.6
5.2
5.8
6.2
6.1
7.2
8.1
8.4
8.8
8.6
8.9
12.6

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

—
10.1
2.3
5.4
2.6
1.9
1.7
1.5
1.2
1.7
1.9
2.5
2.6
3.0
3.0
1.8
2.9
9.2
11.5
16.3

P/BV · reported quarter history

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. · ARLP

—
1.1
1.3
—
—
1.7
1.5
—
—
1.6
1.5
—
—
1.8
1.8
—
—
1.8
1.6
2.0

Core Natural Resources, Inc. · CNR

—
1.9
1.2
2.0
2.2
2.5
1.9
1.5
1.7
2.5
2.2
1.8
2.1
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.5

NACCO Industries, Inc. · NC

—
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.7
0.9
0.9

Natural Resource Partners L.P. · NRP

—
1.3
1.6
1.7
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.3
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.3
2.5
2.6
2.4
2.1
2.3
2.2
2.5

Peabody Energy Corporation · BTU

—
1.8
0.8
1.9
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.1
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.9
1.0
1.2
09 · let price answer last

Market action

Peabody Energy Corporation has the strongest one-year price move in Thermal Coal at +44.6%. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. leads on Mansfield relative strength against the S&P 500 at -2.9%. 0 of 5 covered companies are above zero on that measure. Every line covers 314 weekly closes through 2026-07-28.

Every price line is indexed to 100 over the chosen window. Mansfield relative strength compares a price ratio with its own 52-week average; zero separates leadership from lagging.
Price and relative strength

Price is rebased to 100 inside the selected window. Pair ratio rebases each selected company against one chosen denominator.

Before the conclusion · check the blind spots

What can make this comparison misleading?

This Thermal Coal comparison names 5 specific ways its own evidence can mislead, all listed below. All 5 companies here report on comparable dates, so no rank carries a stale marker. 1 of the 8 ranked sections has fewer than three usable current readings. A high growth rate can still be a low-base artefact.

Keep these limits visible

  • A high growth rate can be a low-base artefact. The page keeps level and change separate for that reason.
  • A high ROCE can be temporary or flattered by a small capital base. Read it beside margin, cash conversion and reinvestment.
  • The 4-Factor Sector Score ranks research priority, not portfolio action. Management quality, catalysts and risks need equally fresh evidence before capital is deployed.
  • An “all companies” line chart preserves completeness, but rank changes should be checked against reporting dates before drawing a conclusion.
  • Thin comparisons: Valuation have fewer than three usable current readings.
10 · the complete set

Which companies are included?

All 5 companies in the canonical Thermal Coal membership are listed below, largest market value first — nothing is silently dropped, even where a company reports too little to rank. The charts above default to a selective view; this register is the complete set, with each company's own latest reporting date beside it.

AHEAD means the company is beating the index by 5% or more over three months. LAGGING, FUNDAMENTALS UP means it is 20% or more behind over a year while its trailing twelve-month earnings grew 20% or more. Both rules are fixed and applied the same way in every sector.

CompanyMarket valuePricePriced toLatest fundamentals
Core Natural Resources, Inc. CNR$4.0B$79.72026-07-28Mar 2026
Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. ARLP$3.3B$25.92026-07-28Mar 2026
Peabody Energy Corporation BTU$2.8B$23.22026-07-28Mar 2026
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP$1.3B$99.52026-07-28Mar 2026
NACCO Industries, Inc. NC$359M$47.62026-07-28Mar 2026
Evidence and freshness

How was this comparison built?

This comparison is built from the reported filings of 5 Thermal Coal companies, normalized to a common $ scale and a shared quarter axis of up to 20 quarters each. Fundamentals run through Mar 2026 and market data through 2026-07-28. A second data feed fills gaps only after identity and scale reconciliation, and missing observations are never interpolated.

FundamentalsThrough Mar 2026 · up to 20 quarters per company
Market dataThrough 2026-07-28 · weekly price and relative-strength history
Derived metricsGrowth, changes, CAPEX intensity, net debt, guarded PEG and P/BV÷ROE are calculated only when their inputs are comparable.
Score confidenceMissing and stale evidence reduces confidence and pulls the 0–100 research-priority score toward neutral.
Questions investors ask · short, speakable answers

Thermal Coal company comparison FAQs

These 18 answers restate the Thermal Coal comparison above in question form. Every one is computed from the same 5 companies and the same reported filings as the rankings and charts, current through Mar 2026. Price and relative-strength answers run through 2026-07-28. Nothing here is estimated, and none of it is a recommendation.

Which Thermal Coal company is the biggest?

Core Natural Resources, Inc. is the largest, with trailing-twelve-month revenue of $4,231 million, ahead of Peabody Energy Corporation at $3,897 million. That covers 4 of 5 companies with comparable reporting through Mar 2026.

Which Thermal Coal company is growing fastest?

Core Natural Resources, Inc. has the fastest revenue growth at 60.6% year on year, across 4 of 5 comparable companies. Fast growth off a small base is not the same as proven scale — check whether the rate holds across several quarters on the chart above before treating it as a trend.

Which Thermal Coal company has the best profit margins?

Natural Resource Partners L.P. has the highest operating margin at 60.2%, from 5 of 5 comparable companies. Core Natural Resources, Inc. shows the biggest recent improvement, at +8.4 percentage points. A high margin matters most when it is holding or rising, not when it is peaking.

Which Thermal Coal company makes the most profit?

Natural Resource Partners L.P. earns the most, at $116 million of trailing-twelve-month net profit, from 4 of 5 comparable companies. Natural Resource Partners L.P. has the fastest profit growth at -30.9%, though growth off a small or recovering profit base overstates how much has actually changed.

Which Thermal Coal company earns the highest return on capital?

Natural Resource Partners L.P. leads on return on capital employed at 3.8%, across 5 of 5 companies. Read it beside the length of its reported history: a high return that repeats for years is evidence of a durable business, while a single high reading can be a small capital base or one good year.

Which Thermal Coal stock is the cheapest?

On guarded PEG — where a LOWER number is cheaper — NACCO Industries, Inc. screens cheapest at 0.14×. Only 2 of 5 companies pass the comparability guard, so this is not a sector-wide "cheapest stock" verdict. Cheap on a multiple is a reason to investigate, never a reason to buy on its own.

Which Thermal Coal company has the strongest balance sheet?

Core Natural Resources, Inc. carries the lowest comparable gross debt at $43 million, from 5 of 5 companies. Absolute rupee debt alone does not settle it, because company scale differs — net debt and debt-to-equity in the chart above carry more information, and a very low-debt balance sheet can also mean under-investment.

Which Thermal Coal company is investing most in new capacity?

Peabody Energy Corporation reports the largest capital spending at $123 million, across 5 of 5 companies. Spending consumes cash before it earns anything, so treat the ranking as a diligence queue: check commissioning, utilisation and the return earned on the completed assets before reading spend as value creation.

Is the Thermal Coal sector beating the market?

Thermal Coal has outperformed S&P 500 by 0.1% over the last 52 weeks and 10.1% over 13 weeks, measured on an equal-weight index of its current members. Inside the sector, 0 of 5 covered companies are beating the market on their own. Sector strength does not transfer evenly to every stock in it.

Which Thermal Coal stock has the strongest price momentum?

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. has the strongest relative strength against S&P 500. Relative strength answers last, after growth, quality and valuation: price can move well before the fundamentals confirm it, and sometimes without them confirming at all.

Which Thermal Coal company scores highest for research priority?

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. scores 60 out of 100 with 52% evidence confidence, from 18.4 points on growth and earnings, 11.5 on capital efficiency, 11.5 on valuation and 18.6 on relative strength. This ranks what deserves work next. It is not a buy recommendation, and management quality, catalysts and risk still need separate research.

How many Thermal Coal companies does this comparison cover, and over what period?

It compares 5 listed companies over up to 20 reported quarters of fundamentals and 5 fiscal years of capital allocation, ending Mar 2026, plus weekly price and relative-strength history. Membership is the full sector list — nothing is dropped for having thin data.

What is the total market cap of the Thermal Coal sector?

The 5 Thermal Coal companies on this page carry $11,862 million of combined market value. Core Natural Resources, Inc. is the largest at $4,020 million, about 34% of the sector's total on its own. Market value moves with price, so this reading is dated 2026-07-28.

What is the Thermal Coal sector's P/E ratio?

The median price-to-earnings ratio across the 5 Thermal Coal companies on this page is 14.2×, measured on the 5 that report a comparable figure. A sector-level history for this multiple is not held here, so this is a cross-section of today, not a comparison with the sector’s own past. Figures are as of 2026-07-28.

How is the Thermal Coal sector performing?

0 of the 5 covered Thermal Coal companies are beating S&P 500 on Mansfield relative strength. The sector itself is 0.1% ahead of S&P 500 over 52 weeks on an equal-weight index of its current members. Readings are as of 2026-07-28.

How many Thermal Coal stocks are listed in the US?

This comparison covers 5 listed Thermal Coal companies in the US, each above the size floor the site applies. The full ranked list is on this page, with reported fundamentals through Mar 2026. Membership is the full industry list — nothing is dropped for having thin data.

Why are some values on this page blank?

A blank means that company did not report a comparable figure for that period, so nothing is shown. Missing observations are never interpolated, carried forward, or replaced with a similar-looking accounting line, and a company with missing evidence has its research score pulled toward neutral rather than being scored as bad.

Is this investment advice?

No. Every figure here is a deterministic calculation from reported company filings and market data, published for research. It contains no recommendation to buy or sell any security, does not account for your circumstances, and is not a substitute for advice from a licensed adviser.

Chat with this pageChat with pageChatChatGPTClaudePerplexityGoogle AI