vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMERICAN BATTERY TECHNOLOGY Co (ABAT) and Nano Labs Ltd (NA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
AMERICAN BATTERY TECHNOLOGY Co is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.8M vs $2.7M, roughly 1.8× Nano Labs Ltd). Nano Labs Ltd runs the higher net margin — 754.5% vs -195.0%, a 949.4% gap on every dollar of revenue.
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.
Weebit Nano is a public semiconductor IP company founded in Israel in 2015 and headquartered in Hod HaSharon, Israel. The company develops Resistive Random-Access Memory technologies. Resistive Random-Access Memory is a specialized form of non-volatile memory (NVM) for the semiconductor industry. The company's products are targeted at a broad range of NVM markets where persistence, performance, and endurance are all required. ReRAM technology can be integrated in electronic devices like weara...
ABAT vs NA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.8M | $2.7M |
| Net Profit | $-9.3M | $20.3M |
| Gross Margin | -33.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | -207.5% | — |
| Net Margin | -195.0% | 754.5% |
| Revenue YoY | 1331.8% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 30.7% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.07 | $1.03 |
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 | $2.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $937.6K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.8M | $1.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $980.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.5M |
| Q4 25 | $-9.3M | $20.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-10.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-10.2M | $-985.5K | ||
| Q1 25 | $-11.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-8.0M |
| Q4 25 | -33.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -375.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -92.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -274.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.1% |
| Q4 25 | -207.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -1080.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -280.1% | -459.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -1086.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -237.2% |
| Q4 25 | -195.0% | 754.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1098.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -366.4% | -85.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -1173.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -231.3% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.07 | $1.03 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.09 | $-0.06 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.14 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.12 |
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 | $4.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $24.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $119.0M | $106.5M |
| Total Assets | $123.3M | $159.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.23× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $47.9M | $4.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $30.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.5M | $50.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $24.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $24.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $22.5M |
| Q4 25 | $119.0M | $106.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $96.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $70.6M | $86.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $65.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-5.1M |
| Q4 25 | $123.3M | $159.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $101.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $84.5M | $206.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $76.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $51.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.23× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.29× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
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 | $-8.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-8.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -312.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 2.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | -0.41× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-9.8M | $-8.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-7.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-7.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-10.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-8.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-7.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-15.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | -312.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -620.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -443.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 133.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.41× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
