Mammoth Energy Services' third quarter 2026 results mark a pivotal step in the company's ongoing transformation from a traditional oilfield services provider into a more diversified, higher-margin business centered on aviation asset leasing. After years of restructuring — including four divestitures in 2025 that generated more than $150 million in proceeds — management has redeployed capital into a growing fleet of aircraft, engines, and auxiliary power units (APUs). The shift matters because aviation leasing carries a recurring revenue profile and requires comparatively modest incremental operating costs, which is already translating into stronger margins. For investors, this report signals whether the strategic pivot is producing durable profitability and whether the balance sheet remains strong enough to fund continued fleet expansion without over-leveraging. I also checked this using Tickeron’s AI Screener to see how the stock compares to others in the industry.
For the third quarter ended September 30, 2026, Mammoth Energy Services (TUSK) reported total revenue of $21.3 million, up 95% from $10.9 million in the same period last year. Net income from continuing operations was $0.3 million, or $0.01 per diluted share, compared with a net loss of $12.6 million, or $0.26 per share, a year earlier.
Adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations rose to $5.8 million from negative $4.8 million in the prior-year quarter, with the adjusted EBITDA margin expanding to 27%, up from 10% in the second quarter of 2026. Gross margin before depreciation improved to 47%, driven by the shift in revenue mix toward higher-margin aviation leasing.
By segment, rental services — which now includes aviation — generated $9.6 million in revenue, more than triple the prior-year quarter. Natural sand proppant services contributed $5.2 million, accommodations $3.4 million, drilling $2.1 million, and infrastructure $1.1 million. The aviation fleet grew to 44 assets, with a deployment rate of 66%. The company ended the quarter with no funded debt and $37.6 million in cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities.
Mammoth Energy Services' third quarter results reinforced the improving sentiment that has accompanied its pivot toward aviation leasing. The return to positive net income and a meaningful sequential jump in adjusted EBITDA margin provided evidence that the company's higher-margin strategy is beginning to flow through to the bottom line. Investor focus centered on the aviation segment, where fleet growth and improving utilization supported both revenue and profitability. The raised full-year margin outlook and the initial 2027 guidance for more than 40% adjusted EBITDA growth offered further visibility into the company's trajectory. At the same time, softer sequential results in drilling and sand — reflecting typical seasonal patterns — served as a reminder that portions of the portfolio remain exposed to commodity-driven customer budgets and activity levels.
Looking ahead, the central story remains the expansion of the aviation platform. Management expects the number of revenue-producing assets to continue growing as newly acquired aircraft, engines, and APUs are placed on lease, and it plans to combine operating cash flow with asset-backed financing to scale the fleet while preserving balance sheet flexibility.
Investors should monitor several key factors. First, fleet utilization and deployment rates will indicate how quickly new assets begin generating revenue. Second, seasonality is expected to weigh on sand, accommodations, and drilling in the fourth quarter, so investors should watch whether higher-margin aviation leasing can offset that softness. Third, the new senior secured term loan facility of up to $58 million marks the company's first financing against the fleet and could influence future capital allocation.
Finally, management has reaffirmed full-year 2026 revenue growth above 90% and raised its adjusted EBITDA margin outlook to the mid-teens, with 2027 adjusted EBITDA projected to rise more than 40%. Progress against those targets, along with any updates on aviation asset sales, will be key signals of whether the transformation continues to accelerate.
In reviewing names like Mammoth Energy Services (TUSK), I often turn to Tickeron’s AI Screener as part of my routine research process. It allows me to quickly filter stocks by technical patterns, fundamentals, and performance metrics, helping surface comparable opportunities without manual effort. This tool has become a practical part of how I cross-check ideas and refine watchlists based on my own criteria.
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.
Sergey Savastiouk, Ph.D. has a degree in Applied Mathematics from Moscow University and has extensive experience as an entrepreneur, investor, manager, and mathematician. His professional expertise is in applied mathematics, mathematical modeling, system and pattern analysis, and software and hardware system integration. He has served as the CEO of several hi-tech start-up companies and nonprofit organizations, which has given him proven capabilities in business strategy for high-tech start-up companies, market assessment, company formation, team building, product development, marketing, and sales. He has published numerous articles in journals and magazines on related fields. As a retail investor, he spent 15 years developing his proprietary trading and quantitative algorithms (now Tickeron’s A.I.), which brought him significant returns in trading the stock market. His current work and goal in founding Tickeron is to bring professional, sophisticated stock market analysis capabilities to retail investors via an easy-to-use interface.
The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) for TUSK turned positive on October 26, 2026. Looking at past instances where TUSK's MACD turned positive, the stock continued to rise in 34 of 40 cases over the following month. The odds of a continued upward trend are 85%.
The Momentum Indicator moved above the 0 level on October 27, 2026. You may want to consider a long position or call options on TUSK as a result. In 78 of 103 past instances where the momentum indicator moved above 0, the stock continued to climb. The odds of a continued upward trend are 76%.
Following a +5.80% 3-day Advance, the price is estimated to grow further. Considering data from situations where TUSK advanced for three days, in 195 of 247 cases, the price rose further within the following month. The odds of a continued upward trend are 79%.
The Stochastic Oscillator has been in the overbought zone for 1 day. Expect a price pull-back in the near future.
The 10-day moving average for TUSK crossed bearishly below the 50-day moving average on September 29, 2026. This indicates that the trend has shifted lower and could be considered a sell signal. In 10 of 16 past instances when the 10-day crossed below the 50-day, the stock continued to move higher over the following month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 62%.
Following a 3-day decline, the stock is projected to fall further. Considering past instances where TUSK declined for three days, the price rose further in 50 of 62 cases within the following month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 83%.
TUSK broke above its upper Bollinger Band on October 29, 2026. This could be a sign that the stock is set to drop as the stock moves back below the upper band and toward the middle band. You may want to consider selling the stock or exploring put options.
The Aroon Indicator for TUSK entered a downward trend on October 26, 2026. This could indicate a strong downward move is ahead for the stock. Traders may want to consider selling the stock or buying put options.
The Tickeron PE Growth Rating for this company is 30 (best 1 - 100 worst), pointing to outstanding earnings growth. The PE Growth rating is based on a comparative analysis of stock PE ratio increase over the last 12 months compared against S&P 500 index constituents.
The Tickeron Price Growth Rating for this company is 47 (best 1 - 100 worst), indicating steady price growth. TUSK’s price grows at a higher rate over the last 12 months as compared to S&P 500 index constituents.
The Tickeron SMR rating for this company is 90 (best 1 - 100 worst), indicating weak sales and an unprofitable business model. SMR (Sales, Margin, Return on Equity) rating is based on comparative analysis of weighted Sales, Income Margin and Return on Equity values compared against S&P 500 index constituents. The weighted SMR value is a proprietary formula developed by Tickeron and represents an overall profitability measure for a stock.
The Tickeron Valuation Rating of 96 (best 1 - 100 worst) indicates that the company is significantly overvalued in the industry. This rating compares market capitalization estimated by our proprietary formula with the current market capitalization. This rating is based on the following metrics, as compared to industry averages: P/B Ratio (0.583) is normal, around the industry mean (-1.008). TUSK's P/E Ratio (318.000) is considerably higher than the industry average of (17.404). Projected Growth (PEG Ratio) (0.030) is also within normal values, averaging (0.772). Dividend Yield (0.157) settles around the average of (640.859) among similar stocks. P/S Ratio (2.140) is also within normal values, averaging (2.059).
The Tickeron Profit vs. Risk Rating rating for this company is 100 (best 1 - 100 worst), indicating that the returns do not compensate for the risks. TUSK’s unstable profits reported over time resulted in significant Drawdowns within these last five years. A stable profit reduces stock drawdown and volatility. The average Profit vs. Risk Rating rating for the industry is 82, placing this stock worse than average.
The average fundamental analysis ratings, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, are as follows
a provider of oilfield services
Industry IndustrialConglomerates