vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMERICAN BATTERY TECHNOLOGY Co (ABAT) and Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Immunovant, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($8.4M vs $4.8M, roughly 1.8× AMERICAN BATTERY TECHNOLOGY Co). AMERICAN BATTERY TECHNOLOGY Co runs the higher net margin — -195.0% vs -899.0%, a 704.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMERICAN BATTERY TECHNOLOGY Co posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (1331.8% vs 140.7%).
American Battery Technology Company, formerly American Battery Metals Corporation, is a US-based battery recycling technology startup founded in 2011. It employs a hydrometallurgical process to recycle batteries and a targeted extraction system to extract raw materials from primary resources.
Immunovant, Inc. is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on developing innovative monoclonal antibody therapies for patients with serious, rare autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Its lead product candidate covers multiple autoimmune indications, with core U.S. operations and a global market expansion strategy.
ABAT vs IMVT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.8M | $8.4M |
| Net Profit | $-9.3M | $-75.3M |
| Gross Margin | -33.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | -207.5% | -896.2% |
| Net Margin | -195.0% | -899.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 1331.8% | 140.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 30.7% | -26.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.07 | $-0.50 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $4.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $937.6K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $980.0K | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $8.4M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $8.9M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $3.6M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $4.1M |
| Q4 25 | $-9.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-10.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-10.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-11.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-75.3M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-51.4M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-58.7M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-73.9M |
| Q4 25 | -33.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -375.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -92.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -274.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -207.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -1080.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -280.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1086.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -896.2% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -576.8% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -1629.6% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -1819.1% |
| Q4 25 | -195.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -1098.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -366.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1173.1% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -899.0% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -575.6% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -1642.3% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -1818.9% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.07 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.14 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-0.50 | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-0.36 | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-0.45 | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-0.57 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $47.9M | $635.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $119.0M | $617.8M |
| Total Assets | $123.3M | $666.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $47.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $30.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.8M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $635.4M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $690.9M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $269.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $330.0M |
| Q4 25 | $119.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $96.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $70.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $65.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $617.8M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $679.3M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $251.8M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $299.9M |
| Q4 25 | $123.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $101.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $84.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $76.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $666.4M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $711.4M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $292.1M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $351.2M |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $-9.8M | $-59.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-59.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -714.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.8% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-214.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-9.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-7.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-59.7M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-47.1M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-60.1M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-47.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-59.8M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-47.2M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-60.1M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-47.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -714.4% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -528.7% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -1682.4% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -1166.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | 1.5% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | 1.0% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 1.1% |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
