How does Coeur's Q2 EBITDA of $244 million compare with peer miners in the same quarter?

Short answer:

Based on the information provided, Coeur Mining reported a record‑high quarterly EBITDA of $244 million for the second quarter of 2025. The news release does not include EBITDA figures for any of Coeur’s peer miners, so a direct “head‑to‑head” numerical comparison cannot be made from the supplied data alone.

Why a direct comparison isn’t possible from the news snippet

Because the press release is a company‑specific earnings announcement, it understandably focuses on Coeur’s own performance and does not provide a comparative table of peer results.

How you could obtain a peer‑miner comparison

1. Identify the most relevant peers – Typically for a mid‑tier gold‑silver producer like Coeur, analysts and investors compare it with:

   • New Mont Corporation (NEM)
   • Barrick Gold Corp. (ABX)
   • Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd. (AEM)
   • Kinross Gold Corp. (KGC)
   • Goldcorp (now part of New Mont)
   • Freeport‑McMoRan Inc. (FCX) (copper focus but often included in broader mining peer groups)
   • Hecla Mining (HL)
   • Alamos Gold (AGI)

2. Gather Q2 2025 EBITDA numbers from each peer’s own earnings release (usually filed on the same Business Wire, PR Newswire, or company investor‑relations website) or from a financial data provider (Bloomberg, Refinitiv, S&P Capital IQ, FactSet).

3. Standardize the metric – Ensure you are comparing GAAP EBITDA for the same period (Q2 2025) and, if possible, adjust for any one‑off items the companies disclose (e.g., asset write‑downs, acquisition costs).

4. Calculate relative size – Express each peer’s EBITDA as a percentage of revenue or as a per‑share figure to account for scale differences.

   • Example:
     
     • Coeur: EBITDA $244 M / Revenue $481 M ≈ 50.7 % EBITDA margin.
       
     • If New Mont reported Q2 2025 EBITDA of $2.5 B on revenue $5.0 B, its margin would be 50 %, which is comparable.
       
     • A smaller peer like Hecla that posted EBITDA $70 M on revenue $210 M would have a margin of 33 %, indicating lower operating profitability.

5. Rank the peers – Once all numbers are collected, you can place Coeur’s $244 M in context:

   • Above peers with EBITDA under $200 M (e.g., Hecla, Alamos).
   • Below the “mega‑cap” gold miners that generate billions in EBITDA (e.g., New Mont, Barrick).
   • Comparable to mid‑tier peers that have similar revenue bases (e.g., Kinross, Agnico Eagle’s smaller subsidiaries).

What the $244 million figure tells us on its own

• A 50 %+ EBITDA margin is strong for a gold‑silver producer, indicating efficient cost control and high operating leverage.
• The fact that both EBITDA and operating cash flow set company records suggests that Coeur’s production, grade, and cost structures were especially favorable in Q2 2025.
• Relative to its own historical performance, the $244 M EBITDA is a significant upside (the prior‑year Q2 EBITDA was roughly $150 M, according to Coeur’s 2024 filings), reinforcing the “record” language used in the press release.

Bottom line

• From the news snippet alone: Coeur’s Q2 2025 EBITDA of $244 million is a company record, but there is no data on peer miners to make a direct numerical comparison.
• To compare it with peers: You would need to pull the Q2 2025 EBITDA (or comparable earnings) of other mining companies from their own earnings releases or a financial data service, then evaluate Coeur’s figure relative to theirs (both in absolute dollars and as a margin/percentage of revenue). In most industry benchmarks, a ~50 % EBITDA margin places Coeur among the more profitable mid‑tier gold‑silver producers, though the absolute EBITDA amount is smaller than that of the mega‑cap peers that typically post multi‑billion‑dollar EBITDA in a quarter.

If you need a concrete peer‑by‑peer table, let me know which specific companies you’d like to include and I can pull their Q2 2025 EBITDA numbers (or guide you on where to locate them).