olivLaw · US equity research
Natural Resource Partners L.P. NRP
Bituminous Coal & Lignite Surface Mining · SIC 1221 · Vertical: Coal mining (SIC 122x)
Natural Resource Partners L.P. (NRP) is a natural resource company that owns and leases a broad portfolio of mineral properties across the United States, with a focus on coal, and holds a 49% stake in Sisecam Wyoming, a soda ash producer. Revenues fell in 2025 as weak prices for metallurgical coal and soda ash weighed on results, and the company now focuses on generating cash and reducing debt. Its earnings depend on coal volumes and prices paid by its lessees and on the soda ash market.
The AI analysis may be outdated: new filings came after its sources (see the «AI analysis» section).
At the close of 04 Nov 2026, Natural Resource Partners L.P. (NRP) stock was 118.50 USD (+1.20% on the day), with market capitalisation 1.6 bn USD, P/E 15.3, beta 0.56, 52-week range 96.00–125.41 USD. Latest reported quarter (Q3 2026): net income of 26.5 m USD (−14.1% YoY).
Data as of · AI analysis dated · Source: SEC filings and closing prices, computed by olivLaw.
Price history
Loading chart…
Technical reading
- RSI (14)
- 67.6
- strong (55–70)
- Bollinger (20, 2)
- 109.50 – 119.24
- in the upper half of the band · %B 0.92 · band width 8.5%
- SMA 50 / 200
- 111.95 / 111.19
- uptrend (price > SMA50 > SMA200)
- MACD (12, 26, 9)
- 1.86 / 1.72
- MACD above signal
Indicators describe past prices; on their own they do not predict direction. On our history the RSI ≤ 40 filter added no return (see the signals methodology).
Performance
| Company | S&P 500 | vs S&P 500 | Vertical median | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 month | +7.9% | −1.1% | +9.0 pp | — |
| 3 months | +12.9% | −0.5% | +13.3 pp | — |
| 6 months | +2.8% | +4.4% | −1.5 pp | — |
| Year to date | +13.5% | +12.3% | +1.2 pp | — |
| 1 year | +14.7% | +13.5% | +1.2 pp | −16.6% |
| 3 years | +71.1% | +76.4% | −5.3 pp | −26.7% |
| 5 years | +276.5% | +63.7% | +212.9 pp | — |
Price returns, dividends excluded.
Quarterly results
Latest quarter: Q3 2026 · 30 Sept 2026
Quarterly margins
Quarterly statements · USD
| Fiscal year | Q4 '24 | Q1 '25 | Q2 '25 | Q3 '25 | Q4 '25 | Q1 '26 | Q2 '26 | Q3 '26 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 61.8 m | 51.3 m | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Cost of revenue | 9.6 m | 6.8 m | 4.2 m | 7.7 m | 5.3 m | 6.1 m | 5.7 m | 5.5 m |
| Operating income | 46.3 m | 42.9 m | 36.6 m | 32.7 m | 32.2 m | 20.6 m | 26.2 m | 27.1 m |
| Depreciation & amortisation | 2.8 m | 4.0 m | 3.8 m | 3.9 m | 3.3 m | 7.6 m | 11.1 m | 6.5 m |
| Interest expense | 3.5 m | 2.7 m | 2.4 m | 1.8 m | 1.2 m | 973.0 k | 1.1 m | 552.0 k |
| Net income | 42.8 m | 40.3 m | 34.2 m | 30.9 m | 31.0 m | 19.6 m | 25.2 m | 26.5 m |
| Operating cash flow | 66.2 m | 34.4 m | 45.6 m ≈ | 41.1 m ≈ | 44.8 m | 33.0 m | 41.0 m ≈ | 44.0 m ≈ |
| Capex | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
≈ derived quarter (cumulative difference / share-days average)
E/P over time
EPS unavailable in the issuer's structured filings (e.g. a partnership reports per unit, not per share).
E/P = trailing-12-month diluted EPS / price at quarter end. E/P is the inverse of P/E and stays defined when earnings are negative.
Fiscal years
| Fiscal year | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 251.1 m | 257.4 m | 139.7 m | 216.1 m | 307.0 m | 278.7 m | 232.4 m | unavailable |
| Revenue YoY | +3.4% | +2.5% | −45.7% | +54.7% | +42.1% | −9.2% | −16.6% | unavailable |
| Net income | 139.5 m | -24.5 m | -84.8 m | 108.9 m | 268.5 m | 278.4 m | 183.6 m | 136.4 m |
| Net income YoY | +57.4% | −117.5% | unavailable | unavailable | +146.5% | +3.7% | −34.0% | −25.7% |
| Diluted EPS | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable |
| Diluted EPS YoY | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable | unavailable |
| net % | 55.6% | -9.5% | -60.7% | 50.4% | 87.5% | 99.9% | 79.0% | unavailable |
| Free cash flow | 188.9 m | unavailable | 89.3 m | 121.8 m | 266.7 m | 311.0 m | 248.5 m | 165.9 m |
Reported results vs expectations
Loading…
Balance sheet & financial health
Fiscal year 2025 · 31 Dec 2025
- Cash
- 30.1 m USD
- Financial debt
- 33.1 m USD
- Net debt
- 2.9 m USD
- Equity
- unavailable USD
- Total assets
- 748.4 m USD
- Debt / equity
- unavailable
- Current ratio
- 1.85x
- ROE
- unavailable
- ROA
- 17.9%
- FCF margin
- unavailable
Financial statements (source on every figure)
Revenue and net income (USD)
Margins
Income statement · USD
| Line | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | Source (latest year) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 139.7 m | 216.1 m | 307.0 m | 278.7 m | 232.4 m | — | SEC (XBRL)· 28 Feb 2025verified |
| Cost of revenue | 24.8 m | 27.0 m | 34.9 m | 32.3 m | 28.0 m | 23.9 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Gross profit | 114.9 m ≈ | 189.1 m ≈ | 272.1 m ≈ | 246.4 m ≈ | 204.3 m ≈ | — | SEC (XBRL)· 28 Feb 2025derived |
| Operating income | -43.9 m | 147.8 m | 305.2 m | 292.5 m | 199.2 m | 144.4 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Depreciation & amortisation | 9.2 m | 19.1 m | 22.5 m | 18.5 m | 15.5 m | 15.0 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| EBITDA | -34.7 m ≈ | 166.9 m ≈ | 327.8 m ≈ | 311.0 m ≈ | 214.7 m ≈ | 159.3 m ≈ | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026derived |
| Interest expense | 41.0 m | 38.9 m | 26.3 m | 14.1 m | 15.6 m | 8.0 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Net income | -84.8 m | 108.9 m | 268.5 m | 278.4 m | 183.6 m | 136.4 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
≈ computed by olivLaw from the reported lines of the same year: Revenue − Cost of revenue; Operating income + Depreciation & amortisation.
Balance sheet · USD
| Line | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | Source (latest year) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash | 99.8 m | 135.5 m | 39.1 m | 12.0 m | 30.4 m | 30.1 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Receivables | 12.3 m | 24.5 m | 42.7 m | 41.1 m | 31.5 m | 28.7 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Current assets | 117.2 m | 162.8 m | 83.6 m | 55.3 m | 63.9 m | 60.9 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Intangibles (excl. goodwill) | 17.5 m | 16.1 m | 14.7 m | 13.7 m | 12.9 m | 11.9 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Total assets | 921.9 m | 953.8 m | 877.1 m | 797.9 m | 772.9 m | 748.4 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Accounts payable | 1.4 m | 2.0 m | 2.0 m | 885.0 k | 909.0 k | 1.2 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Short-term debt | 39.1 m | 39.1 m | 39.1 m | 30.8 m | 14.2 m | 14.2 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Long-term debt | 432.4 m | 394.4 m | 129.2 m | 124.3 m | 127.9 m | 18.9 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Current liabilities | 61.4 m | 64.4 m | 60.2 m | 49.8 m | 31.9 m | 33.0 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Total liabilities | 549.0 m | 513.9 m | 235.1 m | 219.6 m | 221.8 m | 115.8 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
Cash flow · USD
| Line | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | Source (latest year) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating cash flow | 89.3 m | 121.8 m | 266.8 m | 311.0 m | 248.5 m | 165.9 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Capex | 0 | 0 | 118.0 k | 10.0 k | 0 | 0 | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Free cash flow | 89.3 m ≈ | 121.8 m ≈ | 266.7 m ≈ | 311.0 m ≈ | 248.5 m ≈ | 165.9 m ≈ | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026derived |
| Investing cash flow | 1.7 m | 2.4 m | 2.7 m | 5.4 m | 7.5 m | 4.8 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
| Financing cash flow | -89.4 m | -88.5 m | -366.0 m | -343.5 m | -237.5 m | -170.9 m | SEC (XBRL)· 27 Feb 2026verified |
≈ computed by olivLaw from the reported lines of the same year: Operating cash flow − Capex.
Computed indicators
Growth
Profitability
Returns
Balance sheet
Liquidity
Cash
Efficiency
Market and valuation
Risk
Valuation
olivLaw classification
Score: 57 / 100
A scoring methodology on indicators and valuation, not investment advice.
Closing price
04 Nov 2026Source: olivLaw, closing series
Market cap: 1.6 bn USD
Key indicators
Coverage and freshness
Score by group
- Balance sheet58
- Growth20
- Valuation57
- Quality100
Estimated value range
The combined range = the median of the valid methods' low, central and high values; it is not a probability interval and does not cover every result. Envelope of all methods: 59.62 – 242.20 USD.
Valuation assumptions are editorial choices, not measured; beta is not measured.
Method ranges (USD per share)
— — Mid · ▏ Price
Valuation methods
- DCF (discounted cash flow)160.45 – 242.20 (Mid 192.33)WACC 9.3% · starting FCFF 165.9 m USD · terminal value share of EV 73%The WACC × g sensitivity gives the method's bounds; these are not probabilities.Reverse DCF: starting growth implied by the price (fading linearly to terminal growth, everything else fixed): -17.5%
- Peers: EV/EBITDA59.62 – 84.93 (Mid 73.38)4 companies used · median multiple 6.9x · quartiles 5.6x – 8.1xARLP, BTU, CNR, HCC
- Peers: P/E113.26 – 137.55 (Mid 132.61)3 companies used · median multiple 17.2x · quartiles 14.7x – 17.8xARLP, HCC, NC
- Dividend discount (DDM)unavailable · the company pays no dividend: a dividend model needs an explicit initiation assumption
Classification (SIC) comparables group by industry code, not by economic activity; the direct group is an editorial selection by activity. Members' multiples are on their own trailing twelve months, at their own latest close.
Assumptions (illustrative, editorial)
- Risk-free rate
- 4.3%
- Equity risk premium
- 5.0%
- Beta (default)
- 1.00
- Cost of equity
- 9.3%
- Terminal growth
- 2.5%
Factor scorecard
Neutral profile · Score 57/100
| Factor | Value | Score | Weight used |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROIC · Quality | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Net margin · Quality | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| FCF conversion · Quality | 159.0% | 100 (on a fixed band) | 10% |
| Revenue CAGR 3Y · Growth | 2.4% | 20 (on a fixed band) | 13% |
| EPS CAGR 3Y · Growth | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Net debt / EBITDA · Balance sheet | -0.3x | 17 (vs peers) | 16% |
| Interest coverage · Balance sheet | 28.4x | 100 (on a fixed band) | 10% |
| Current ratio · Balance sheet | 2.7x | 100 (on a fixed band) | 6% |
| P/E (TTM) · Valuation | 15.3x | 60 (vs peers) | 16% |
| EV/EBITDA · Valuation | 11.4x | 20 (vs peers) | 16% |
| FCF yield · Valuation | 10.4% | 100 (on a fixed band) | 13% |
| Shareholder yield (distributions) · Returns | unavailable | unavailable | — |
| Payout ratio (FCF) · Returns | unavailable | unavailable | — |
Factors without a value were dropped; the remaining weights were renormalised.
Score groups
- Balance sheet58/100 · 3/3 factors with a value
- Growth· partial20/100 · 1/2 factors with a value
- Quality· partial100/100 · 1/3 factors with a value
- Returns· partialunavailable · 0/2 factors with a value
- Valuation57/100 · 3/3 factors with a value
A «partial» group is computed from under half of its weight or from one factor: it is not a full assessment of the group.
Memo
NATURAL RESOURCE PARTNERS LP (NRP). Latest full fiscal year: 2024; data up to 2026-09-30.
Figures computed from the financial statements: revenue 232.4 m USD in 2024; YoY growth -16.6%; net debt/EBITDA -0.3x.
The estimated value range is 113.26–137.55 USD per share (median of 3 methods, agreement: low); assumptions are illustrative. Against the central value of 132.61 USD, the price of 118.50 USD leaves a potential of 11.9% (value / price − 1) and a margin of safety of 10.6% (1 − price / value). The range is the median of the methods' low, central and high values, not a probability interval.
olivLaw score 57/100, methodological classification: neutral profile (score, margin of safety and method agreement together; not a judgement of the right price). Groups assessed only in part: growth, quality, returns. Not investment advice.
Text generated deterministically from the figures shown; no language model. Not investment advice.
What supports the thesis
- FCF conversion: 159.0%
- Interest coverage: 28.4x
- Current ratio: 2.7x
- FCF yield: 10.4%
What contradicts it
- Revenue CAGR 3Y: 2.4%
- Net debt / EBITDA: -0.3x
- EV/EBITDA: 11.4x
- The valuation methods diverge
Not assessed (insufficient data or a ratio without meaning): ROIC, Net margin, EPS CAGR 3Y, Shareholder yield (distributions), Payout ratio (FCF).
Versus the vertical median
Coal mining (SIC 122x) · same industry group (3-digit SIC) · compared with 8 companies
Multiples and returns vs the median
Price rebased to 100 (monthly, 5 years)
Companies in the vertical
| Market cap | P/E | ROE | Net margin | Revenue YoY | 1A / 3A | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HCCWarrior Met Coal, Inc. | 4.3 bn | 18.5 | 10.4% | 12.5% | −14.1% | +3% / +45% |
| CNRCore Natural Resources, Inc. | 4.0 bn | 40.4 | 2.7% | 2.3% | +86.2% | +0% / −25% |
| ARLPAlliance Resource Partners LP | 3.2 bn | 12.2 | — | 12.3% | −10.4% | +3% / +20% |
| BTUPeabody Energy Corp | 2.1 bn | — | -5.0% | -4.3% | −8.9% | −38% / −29% |
| AMRAlpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. | 2.0 bn | — | -3.0% | -2.2% | −28.0% | −3% / −45% |
| NRPNatural Resource Partners LP | 1.6 bn | 15.3 | — | — | −16.6% | +15% / +71% |
| METCRamaco Resources, Inc. | 310.0 m | — | -15.0% | -12.2% | −19.5% | −56% / −57% |
| ARECAmerican Resources Corporation | 106.5 m | 1.6 | 718.3% | — | −100.0% | −64% / −40% |
| NCNacco Industries, Inc. | — | 17.2 | 3.4% | 5.3% | +16.6% | −30% / −2% |
1- and 3-year price returns: for NRP from daily closes (the same as the performance table), for the other companies from month-end closes.
olivLaw engine forecast
The world engine ran after the company's latest material disclosure. Probabilities are of TOUCHING a level within the horizon (not closing there) and sit next to the random walk (p_rw), the no-information benchmark.
The engine has no published run for this company yet.
Valuation scenarios (editable assumptions)
Illustrative scenarios
Scenarios are not available. input data missing
AI analysis
AI-generatedAI-generated analysis (Claude) from cited public sources; it may contain errors. Not investment advice. As of 27 Oct 2026 · Model: claude-haiku-5-5.
Possibly outdated: the newest document it read is from 05 Aug 2026; since then the company filed 8-K (04 Nov 2026 · results), 10-Q (04 Nov 2026).
In brief
Natural Resource Partners L.P. (NRP) is a natural resource company that owns and leases a broad portfolio of mineral properties across the United States, with a focus on coal, and holds a 49% stake in Sisecam Wyoming, a soda ash producer. Revenues fell in 2025 as weak prices for metallurgical coal and soda ash weighed on results, and the company now focuses on generating cash and reducing debt. Its earnings depend on coal volumes and prices paid by its lessees and on the soda ash market 123.
SWOT
Strengths
- A large and diversified mineral portfolio provides revenues from several production regions, and the royalty structure carries no direct operating costs.
- Low leverage and available liquidity give the company financial flexibility.
- The stake in Sisecam Wyoming, one of the lowest-cost producers in its field, offers potential distributions once the market recovers.
Weaknesses
- Revenues depend on a small number of lessees, and financial trouble at any of them could significantly affect royalty payments.
- Distributions are variable and depend on cash flow, and the board can reduce or suspend them.
- The soda ash segment has not generated distributions in recent quarters, which makes its revenues unstable.
Opportunities
- A recovery in steel demand or a contraction of Chinese capacity could support coal and soda ash prices.
- If the market for carbon sequestration and renewable energy becomes clearer, existing rights could generate new revenue.
- Lower debt could allow the company to raise distributions to unitholders in the coming period.
Threats
- Bankruptcies or mine closures among lessees could lead to lost royalties and impairments.
- Trade tariffs and sanctions on American coal could reduce the prices lessees receive.
- Substitution of coal by natural gas and renewables could reduce long-term demand for the company's products.
Risks
- Dependence on a few lesseeshigh
A significant share of revenues comes from a small number of lessees, and any interruption in their payments could have a disproportionate effect on results.
- Volatile coal priceshigh
Metallurgical and thermal coal prices depend on external factors, and further declines could make some mines unprofitable.
- Low soda ash pricesmedium
Oversupply from China keeps prices below production cost, which could prolong the period without distributions from Sisecam Wyoming.
- Trade policymedium
Tariffs and trade restrictions could reduce the prices lessees receive and therefore the royalties the company collects.
- Debt and payment obligationslow
Debt service and principal repayments could limit financial flexibility if cash flow declines.
Investment thesis
What would need to be true (bull case)
- If steel demand and coal prices improve, royalty revenues could rise quickly, supported by an extensive mineral portfolio.
- Low leverage and available liquidity could allow the company to raise distributions after reducing debt, as management intends.
- The Sisecam Wyoming stake could generate significant distributions if the soda ash market returns to balance.
What would break the thesis
- If coal and soda ash prices remain low, revenues and distributions could continue to decline.
- Dependence on a few lessees could expose the company to sudden losses if one of them runs into financial difficulty.
- Long-term demand for coal could fall as natural gas and renewable energy gain market share.
What to watch
- Level of the distribution for the third quarter of 2026Q3 2026
- Evolution of metallurgical coal prices and lessee volumes2026
- Resumption of distributions from Sisecam Wyoming2027
- Progress on debt reduction and any increase in unitholder distributionsnext 10-K
Products, market & competition
AI-generatedAI-generated analysis (Claude) from cited public sources; it may contain errors. Not investment advice. As of 27 Oct 2026 · Model: claude-haiku-5-5.
Possibly outdated: the newest document it read is from 05 Aug 2026; since then the company filed 8-K (04 Nov 2026 · results), 10-Q (04 Nov 2026).
The business
NRP is a diversified natural resource company organized as a master limited partnership and headquartered in Houston, which owns, manages and leases a portfolio of mineral properties in the United States, including interests in coal and other natural resources 1. The company reports in two operating segments, Mineral Rights and Soda Ash, while corporate and financing functions earn no revenues 1. Its units trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol NRP 1.
NRP's revenues come mainly from royalties paid by mining lessees, based on coal volumes sold and the price per ton, and from distributions on its non-controlling stake in Sisecam Wyoming 1. The company does not operate the mines itself; lessees run them, and NRP bears the risk tied to their production levels and their ability to pay 1. Its results therefore depend significantly on a few lessees with large shares of revenue 1.
Beyond coal, the company holds rights to industrial minerals and to carbon sequestration and renewable energy activities, which it describes as opportunities still under exploration 13. Distributions to unitholders depend on cash flow, debt service obligations and the reserves the board considers necessary 13.
Segments
Mineral Rights
The Mineral Rights segment includes about 13 million acres of mineral interests and subsurface rights, and its revenues come mainly from coal royalties 1. In 2025 segment revenues declined from the prior year because of lower metallurgical coal prices and volumes 1. In the second quarter of 2026 Mineral Rights revenues rose from the prior year quarter, supported by higher volumes and prices at certain properties 3.
Soda Ash
The Soda Ash segment consists of the 49% stake in Sisecam Wyoming, one of the lowest-cost soda ash producers in the world, and generates cash only when distributions are paid 1. Revenues fell sharply in 2025 because of lower soda ash prices, and the company received no distributions in recent quarters 13. The company agreed to make an additional investment in Sisecam Wyoming to reduce its debt 2.
Market context
The coal market remains weak, with metallurgical coal prices affected by softer steel demand and thermal coal prices by low natural gas prices and ample supply at power plants 13. The soda ash market is oversupplied, mainly because of new capacity from China, and prices sit below production cost for many producers 13. The company does not expect a quick recovery in these prices or a resumption of Sisecam Wyoming distributions for several years 13.
Markets for carbon sequestration and renewable energy revenue remain difficult because of high costs and an uncertain regulatory framework, which could delay any monetization of these rights 1. Medium-term performance depends on trade policy, tariffs on American coal and global steel demand 1.
Trends
- Weak demand for metallurgical coalheadwind
Global steel demand and weak metallurgical coal prices weigh on royalties, especially at the properties that make up the largest share of revenues 13.
- Oversupply of soda ashheadwind
New capacity in China has kept soda ash prices below production cost, and distributions from Sisecam Wyoming have been suspended 13.
- Partial recovery in coal volumesmixed
Higher volumes and prices at some properties supported revenues in the first half of 2026, which could continue if the market stabilizes 23.
- Debt reduction and a stronger balance sheettailwind
Low leverage and high liquidity let the company meet its obligations, and plans to reduce debt and raise distributions depend on cash flow 13.
Competitive position
The supplied sources do not name direct competitors of NRP as a list; the company is compared with other mineral rights owners and coal producers that lease similar properties, but these are not named explicitly in the documents reviewed. In soda ash, competition comes from higher-cost producers and from new capacity in China, which pushes prices down 1.
Competitive pressure also comes from natural gas and renewable energy, which replace coal in electricity generation and reduce demand for thermal coal 1.
- Other mineral rights and coal property owners
Competitors in acquiring and leasing coal properties, not named explicitly in the sources reviewed.
- Soda ash producers in China
Main source of new capacity that has pushed soda ash prices below production cost.
- Natural gas producers
Cheap gas competes with thermal coal in electricity generation.
- Renewable energy sources
Growing share of renewables reduces demand for thermal coal.
Links, dependencies and risks
Who the company is tied to, from its own SEC filings (customers, suppliers, production, partners, competitors, countries, regulation), from the 5 %+ holders' statements (13D/13G) and from what other companies say about it. Click a node for its evidence; on a listed company the graph moves to it.
Loading the links…
News & filings
In the press
No news in our archive over the last 180 days.
SEC filings
- Quarterly report04 Nov 2026
- Current report04 Nov 2026Results of operations · Financial statements and exhibits
- Quarterly report05 Aug 2026
- Current report05 Aug 2026Results of operations · Financial statements and exhibits
- Quarterly report06 May 2026
- Current report06 May 2026Results of operations · Financial statements and exhibits
- Annual report27 Feb 2026
- Current report27 Feb 2026Results of operations · Financial statements and exhibits
- Quarterly report04 Nov 2025
- Current report04 Nov 2025Results of operations · Financial statements and exhibits
Sources
- [1] Form 10-K, fiscal year ended 2025-12-31 · SEC / Natural Resource Partners L.P. · 27 Feb 2026
- [2] Form 10-Q, quarter ended 2026-06-30 · SEC / Natural Resource Partners L.P. · 05 Aug 2026
- [3] Form 8-K, results release (exhibit 99.1) · SEC / Natural Resource Partners L.P. · 05 Aug 2026
Figures computed by olivLaw from SEC filings and closing prices; the qualitative analysis is AI-generated from cited sources. Not investment advice.