Logo

PROP

Prairie Operating Co.

PROP

Prairie Operating Co. NASDAQ
$1.87 3.31% (+0.06)

Market Cap $94.02 M
52w High $10.58
52w Low $1.64
Dividend Yield 0%
P/E -0.9
Volume 652.38K
Outstanding Shares 50.28M

Income Statement

Period Revenue Operating Expense Net Income Net Profit Margin Earnings Per Share EBITDA
Q3-2025 $77.721M $12.389M $1.287M 1.656% $-0.44 $26.364M
Q2-2025 $68.1M $16.967M $35.683M 52.398% $1.04 $57.005M
Q1-2025 $13.59M $5.844M $-2.617M -19.257% $-3.49 $878K
Q4-2024 $7.939M $5.876M $-11.937M -150.359% $-0.52 $-10.362M
Q3-2024 $0 $8.816M $-11.424M 0% $-0.68 $-11.423M

Balance Statement

Period Cash & Short-term Total Assets Total Liabilities Total Equity
Q3-2025 $10.64M $939.788M $837.951M $101.837M
Q2-2025 $10.653M $858.54M $599.777M $258.763M
Q1-2025 $14.972M $775.445M $553.121M $222.324M
Q4-2024 $5.192M $156.554M $103.786M $52.768M
Q3-2024 $40.052M $107.175M $45.888M $61.287M

Cash Flow Statement

Period Net Income Cash From Operations Cash From Investing Cash From Financing Net Change Free Cash Flow
Q3-2025 $1.287M $57.662M $-86.247M $28.572M $-13K $449.897M
Q2-2025 $35.683M $-7.21M $6.142M $-3.251M $-4.319M $-47.133M
Q1-2025 $-2.617M $16.932M $-528.431M $521.279M $9.78M $1.932M
Q4-2024 $-11.937M $-3.692M $-69.426M $38.257M $-34.86M $-23.693M
Q3-2024 $-11.424M $2.791M $-2.141M $37.176M $37.826M $-2.517M

Five-Year Company Overview

Income Statement

Income Statement Prairie Operating looks like an early‑stage operating company rather than a mature producer or financial firm. Revenue has been essentially nonexistent so far, and the business has been running at recurring operating and net losses for several years. The losses are not exploding, but they also are not yet showing a clear path toward profitability. Very volatile earnings per share mainly reflect past share restructurings and reverse splits, not a suddenly swinging underlying business. Overall, the income statement tells a story of a company still in build‑out mode, with expenses running ahead of any meaningful revenue base.


Balance Sheet

Balance Sheet The balance sheet is small and still quite light for a company developing real assets. Total assets have recently stepped up from almost negligible levels, suggesting investments into the new operating strategy, but the absolute base remains modest. Cash is limited, meaning the company does not appear to have a large cushion. Debt exists but is not overwhelming relative to the size of the company; however, even moderate leverage can matter when cash generation is negative. Equity has only recently turned positive after a period of deficit, helped by capital injections and restructurings. Overall, the financial foundation is improving from a very low base but remains thin and dependent on continued access to capital.


Cash Flow

Cash Flow Cash flows mirror the income statement: the core business is consuming cash, not generating it. Operating cash flow has been consistently negative, showing that day‑to‑day operations are not yet self‑funding. Free cash flow is also negative because the company is spending on capital projects while still pre‑scale on revenue. Capital spending has been ramping from almost nothing to modest but meaningful levels, which fits with a transition from a shell/SPAC past into a real operating asset base. The key implication is that the business still relies on external financing—equity, debt, or asset deals—to support its development plans until operations can cover both operating costs and investment needs.


Competitive Edge

Competitive Edge Competitively, Prairie is positioning itself as a focused operator in the DJ Basin rather than a broad financial services player. Its edge is tied to location, operating model, and deal discipline. Concentration in rural parts of the DJ Basin offers a relatively favorable permitting and regulatory backdrop compared with more constrained basins, which can translate into faster project approvals and fewer delays. The company is trying to grow through targeted acquisitions of existing wells and drilling locations, emphasizing assets with established production and infrastructure. In a basin with several larger, well‑capitalized competitors, Prairie’s strategy leans on being nimble, disciplined on what it buys, and efficient in how it develops and optimizes wells. The moat here is narrow but real: permitting advantages, operational know‑how in a specific basin, and a reputation for responsible development and ESG alignment that can appeal to regulators and local stakeholders.


Innovation and R&D

Innovation and R&D Prairie’s differentiation is heavily tied to operational innovation and ESG‑driven practices rather than laboratory‑style R&D. It is using advanced well designs, such as U‑turn or horseshoe laterals, to squeeze more production out of constrained acreage while limiting surface disturbance. Multi‑bench completions from a single pad aim to unlock several stacked zones at once, boosting returns on each location. The company is also moving toward electrified operations—electric frac fleets, electric rigs, and pipeline‑connected gas handling—to cut emissions and fuel costs versus traditional diesel‑heavy setups. Its asset optimization work, including targeted workovers and production enhancements on existing wells, shows a focus on “sweating the assets” rather than just drilling more. Future‑oriented ideas like carbon capture evaluations and further emissions reductions suggest an R&D mindset centered on applied field technology and sustainability, which could become a branding and cost advantage if executed well.


Summary

Overall, Prairie Operating looks like a small, evolving energy operator still early in its life as a true operating company. Financially, it is pre‑scale: minimal revenue, ongoing losses, negative cash flow, and a thin but improving balance sheet. That profile carries obvious funding and execution risks, especially if capital markets become less welcoming. Strategically, the company’s focus on the DJ Basin, efficiency‑oriented well designs, electrified operations, and ESG‑integrated development gives it a clear identity in a crowded upstream landscape. Its potential strengths lie in being specialized, technologically progressive, and disciplined on acquisitions. The key questions going forward are whether it can convert those strategic and technical choices into steadily growing production, positive cash flow, and a stronger balance sheet before funding constraints or operational setbacks become limiting. For now, the story is more about positioning and promise than proven financial performance.