vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ALUMIS INC. (ALMS) and TDH Holdings, Inc. (PETZ). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ALUMIS INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.7M vs $1.5M, roughly 1.8× TDH Holdings, Inc.). ALUMIS INC. runs the higher net margin — 2225.1% vs -90.1%, a 2315.2% gap on every dollar of revenue.
ALUMIS INC. is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on developing innovative targeted therapies for patients suffering from autoimmune and inflammatory disorders. It advances multiple product candidates through clinical trials, aiming to address unmet medical needs for patient populations across global markets.
TDH Holdings, Inc. is a pet product enterprise that develops, manufactures and distributes a comprehensive portfolio of pet food, nutritional treats, and daily pet supplies for dogs and cats. Its primary market is mainland China, catering to both online e-commerce and offline physical retail customer segments.
ALMS vs PETZ — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2023
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.7M | $1.5M |
| Net Profit | $59.3M | $-1.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | 27.5% |
| Operating Margin | -5271.5% | -149.8% |
| Net Margin | 2225.1% | -90.1% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 205.0% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.77 | — |
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.
| Q2 25 | $2.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.4M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $1.5M |
| Q2 25 | $59.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-99.0M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-1.3M |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 27.5% |
| Q2 25 | -5271.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -583.9% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -149.8% |
| Q2 25 | 2225.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -569.1% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -90.1% |
| Q2 25 | $0.77 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.82 | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $486.3M | $31.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $485.3M | $21.2M |
| Total Assets | $610.9M | $36.5M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $486.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $208.7M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $31.8M |
| Q2 25 | $485.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $168.3M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $21.2M |
| Q2 25 | $610.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $261.3M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $36.5M |
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 | $-106.4M | $-581.1K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-107.0M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -4012.3% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 23.1% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -1.79× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $-106.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-80.4M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-581.1K |
| Q2 25 | $-107.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-80.4M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | -4012.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -462.3% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | 23.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | -1.79× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
