vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AURORA CANNABIS INC (ACB) and Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. (FIGR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($156.4M vs $81.6M, roughly 1.9× AURORA CANNABIS INC). Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 57.3% vs -756.4%, a 813.7% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Aurora Cannabis Inc. is a Canadian licensed cannabis producer, headquartered in Edmonton. It trades on the Toronto Stock Exchange and Nasdaq as ACB. As of September 2018, Aurora Cannabis had eight licensed production facilities, five sales licences, and operations in 25 countries. It had a funded capacity of over 625,000 kilograms of cannabis production per annum with the bulk of capacity based in Canada and a growing presence in international markets, particularly Denmark and Latin America. ...
Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. is a financial technology company in Reno, Nevada, United States. Established in 2018, it develops and operates blockchain-based platforms used in lending, capital markets, and asset management.
ACB vs FIGR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2024 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $81.6M | $156.4M |
| Net Profit | $-617.0M | $89.6M |
| Gross Margin | 8.7% | — |
| Operating Margin | -73.7% | 33.7% |
| Net Margin | -756.4% | 57.3% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.34 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $1.1B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $466.8M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $1.2B |
| Total Assets | — | $2.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.40× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | $466.8M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | $2.2B | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
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 | $-4.3M | $49.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-8.6M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -10.6% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.3% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 0.55× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | $49.3M | ||
| Q2 23 | $-4.3M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $-8.6M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | -10.6% | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | 5.3% | — |
| Q3 25 | — | 0.55× | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
