Yes and no (more "no" than "yes"). Answers can be given at various levels.

a) the "yes" part: electrons are indistinguishable and therefore they're all the same im some sense. The single electron invariably is an objet with spin 1/2.

b) Electrons can be in different states with different properties, including different magnetic moments. The simplest configuration in which this can be appreciated is the hydrogen atom, considering not nly its ground state but also the excited states (excluding, for the sake of simplicity, hyperfine interaction). Excited states include states of different orbital angular momenta which then contribute to the total magnetic moment (see also spin orbit coupling). Magnetic moments therefore, are not alone determined by the electron being an electron but actually the state which they occupy.

c) The case of ferrimagnets above needs some more thinking. We're not talking about sinle electrons here, but about magnetic atoms. In most cases there is a moment determined by some open (i.e. not fully ocupied) d or f shell (or both...) with more than one electron contributing (or more than one hole) to the magnetic characteristics.

Going back to individual atoms, this brings us to understanding the electronic and magnetic properties of open shell atoms, i.e. transition metal and Lanthanide atoms (these are the most frequent ones in magnetic materials, but this is by no means an exhaustive list).

Many things could be said here. One I like emphasizing is that in principle there is nothing like "an electron" in a system with 2 or more interacting electron. Their indistinguishability brings about the Pauli principle. In the simplest case, as a consequence, we have to formulate the more-than-one electronic state in the shape of a Slater determinant, not so seldom as a linear combination of several Slater determinants in order to get realistic results. This in turn gives rise to non-classical energy terms such as exchange coupling which in turn determine the magnetic state of the atom. For the ground state of quite many atoms, Hund's rules are a good guide to the result of all this.

When atoms are built into solids, then the electrostatic potential the electrons reside in changes from the (effective) spherical symmetry of a free atom to the nonspherical one imposed by the presence of the surrounding atoms. This may provoke (and does so, in TM atoms, in particular) strong changes to the atomic states and their magnetic character, mostly affecting the orbital magnetic moments.

In many cases, the orbital quantum number ml ceases to be a good one, and electroic states essentially become mixtures of states |+ml> and |-ml>. This is being called "quenching of orbital moments" [*],[**]. Therefore, we may restrict the further discussion to the spin magnetic moment.

Maybe the most "classic" ferrimagnet is magnetite. Local moments almost exclusively derive from Fe 3d electrons. Roughly said, there are two chemically inequivalent occurrences of iron in this material, Fe2+ and Fe3+. Taking this notion serious [***] we would in any case assume that "both 4s electrons" [****] of the neutral atomic configuration are given away to oxygen (over-exaggerated assumtion of ionic bonding) and that in addition, the Fe3+ ions have given one more electron away. So we end up with 6 electrons in the 3d-shell for Fe2+ and 5 electrons in the d-shell for Fe3+. Taking just Hund's first rule and assuming the orbital moments to be quenched for simplicity, we obtain S=2 for Fe2+ and S=2.5 for Fe3+. That gives an oriented moment of 4µB for Fe2+ and 5 µB for Fe3+. Therefore, despite all electrons being indistinguishabe and thus "the same", different atoms may nevertheless possess magnetic moments of different magnitude.

Quite a few aspects of magnetite magnetism may be understood on the basis of this oversimplified picture, if you put the Fe2+ and Fe3+ atoms at the correct positons of te crystal lattice, which happens to be a spinel structure. Halas, it's geometry is not simple, the unit cell is quite huge and I will not even try to go in any detail here. You will find loads of articles and images etc. on the web.

[*] The residual spin orbit interaction prevents this quenching from being effective to 100%. This is important in so far, as that magnetic anisotropy is rooted in the remaining orbital magnetic character in many cases.

[**] The situation is very different in many Lanthanides. The energy terms favoring quenching of orbital moments are usually way weaker than the spin orbit splitting, and the orbital moment therefore largely survives in many compounds. Again, as a result, large magnetic anisotropy may result in solids. Small additions of RE elements to magnetic TM alloys therefore are used to tune magnetic anisotropy, e.g. in hard disk materials.

[***] Beware: the literature on this covers thousands of pages, literally! The "real" situation is more subtle and complex than I do describe it.

[****] This language is so attractive, that I use it here for simplicity. From what I said in the third § under (c), you would think that there are no "4s electrons", strictly speaking. But formulating every phrase using many electron configurations explicitely makes for a heavy language.

Yes every electron has same magnetic moment, but in case ferrimagnetic materials, if you have ions with same magnetic moment, then the net will be zero. for example, Fe3+ - Fe3+. On the otherhand, if you have Fe3+(d5)-Cr3+(d3), there will be non zero net moment. Hope you understand