vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AbCellera Biologics Inc. (ABCL) and Caledonia Mining Corp Plc (CMCL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Caledonia Mining Corp Plc is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($46.9M vs $44.9M, roughly 1.0× AbCellera Biologics Inc.). Caledonia Mining Corp Plc runs the higher net margin — 7.0% vs -19.9%, a 26.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AbCellera Biologics Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (788.4% vs 13.8%). Over the past eight quarters, AbCellera Biologics Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (112.3% CAGR vs 17.1%).
AbCellera Biologics Inc. is a Vancouver, British Columbia-based biotechnology company that discovers and develops antibody therapeutics. The company is best known for its leading role in the Pandemic Prevention Platform, a project of DARPA's Biological Technologies Office. AbCellera utilizes a proprietary technology platform, which they claim can develop "medical countermeasures within 60 days." Its platform for single-cell screening was initially developed at the University of British Columbia.
Hochschild Mining plc is a leading British-based silver and gold mining business operating in North, Central, and South America. It is headquartered in Lima, Peru, with a corporate office in London, is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 250 Index. The main shareholder is the Peruvian businessman Eduardo Hochschild.
ABCL vs CMCL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $44.9M | $46.9M |
| Net Profit | $-8.9M | $3.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | 41.2% |
| Operating Margin | -63.7% | 18.6% |
| Net Margin | -19.9% | 7.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 788.4% | 13.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 73.9% | -33.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.03 | $0.13 |
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 | $44.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.5M | $46.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.3M | $50.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.0M | $38.5M |
| Q4 25 | $-8.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-57.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-34.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-45.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-51.1M | $3.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-36.9M | $10.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-40.6M | $2.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 41.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 45.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 35.9% |
| Q4 25 | -63.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -851.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -290.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1479.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -1439.4% | 18.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1276.2% | 32.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -551.5% | 13.8% |
| Q4 25 | -19.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -637.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -203.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1077.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -785.4% | 7.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -504.3% | 20.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | -408.0% | 5.4% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.03 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.19 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.12 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.15 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.17 | $0.13 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.13 | $0.42 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.14 | $0.07 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $128.5M | $7.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $966.9M | $231.0M |
| Total Assets | $1.4B | $339.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $128.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $83.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $92.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $159.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $156.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $126.6M | $7.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $148.3M | $15.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $123.6M | $1.8M |
| Q4 25 | $966.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $964.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $231.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $231.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | $220.3M |
| Q4 25 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | $339.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $338.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.5B | $321.8M |
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 | $-34.7M | $4.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-44.6M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -99.4% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 21.9% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.40× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-174.1M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-34.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-52.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-32.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-11.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-108.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-28.9M | $4.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-30.0M | $19.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-41.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-44.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-61.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-45.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-22.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-187.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-47.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-50.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-65.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | -99.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -687.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -267.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -524.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -3702.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -728.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -683.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -661.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 21.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 99.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 78.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 251.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1552.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 284.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 274.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 242.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.40× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.87× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
