Same Coin, Different Value: A Multi-Year Comparative Analysis of Financial Performance of Open Access and Legacy Publishers

We are living in an era where the demand for Open Access to knowledge is growing and the need for transparency in scientific publishing is becoming imperative. The question that arises at this stage is whether openness in knowledge constitutes the Achilles heel of the once profitable legacy publishing industry or whether it is the Trojan horse of the latter for increasing its revenues. At the same time, the question of whether Open Access publishers can ensure their sustainability through this model remains unanswered. This study implements a multi-year analysis (2019–2023) comparing the performance of Open Access and legacy publishers. Using a set of financial ratios—grouped by profitability, liquidity, efficiency, and solvency, as well as data on firm size (revenues, assets, and employee counts), we assess their financial performance. The results indicate that legacy publishers have enormous scale, stable profitability, and high leverage, but low liquidity and return on equity. On the other hand, OA publishers, although smaller, have higher returns, better liquidity, and almost zero borrowing, but with greater annual volatility. The study discusses that OA publishers, despite their small size, can be as profitable as or even more profitable than traditional publishers, thanks to flexible structures and fast cash flows, but remain vulnerable due to limited resources and the risk of acquisition. Furthermore, legacy publishers maintain their dominance by leveraging their scale, strong brands, and investment capacity while adopting or acquiring OA models, creating a competitive environment where scale and strategic differentiation are decisive.