vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Aeluma, Inc. (ALMU) and MANHATTAN BRIDGE CAPITAL, INC (LOAN). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
MANHATTAN BRIDGE CAPITAL, INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.1M vs $1.3M, roughly 1.6× Aeluma, Inc.). MANHATTAN BRIDGE CAPITAL, INC runs the higher net margin — 61.6% vs -145.7%, a 207.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, MANHATTAN BRIDGE CAPITAL, INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-9.1% vs -21.1%).
Aeluma, Inc. is a U.S.-headquartered technology firm focused on the design, development, and production of high-performance optoelectronic components and semiconductor products. Its core offerings include photonic sensors and laser diodes, serving the LiDAR, 5G/6G communication, industrial sensing, and automotive markets across North America and the Asia-Pacific region.
Manhattan Bridge Capital, Inc. is a U.S.-based real estate finance firm that provides short-term asset-backed secured loans primarily to real estate investors. Its core offerings include bridge loans for residential and commercial property acquisitions, rehabilitation, and refinancing, serving clients across key U.S. real estate markets.
ALMU vs LOAN — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.3M | $2.1M |
| Net Profit | $-1.9M | $1.3M |
| Gross Margin | 27.8% | — |
| Operating Margin | -163.6% | 61.4% |
| Net Margin | -145.7% | 61.6% |
| Revenue YoY | -21.1% | -9.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 36.0% | -7.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.11 | $0.11 |
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.
| Q1 26 | — | $2.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3M | $2.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4M | $2.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-1.9M | $1.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.5M | $1.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 27.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 49.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | 61.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | -163.6% | 55.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -116.1% | 58.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 59.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 60.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 55.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 60.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 57.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | 61.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | -145.7% | 56.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | -107.8% | 59.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 60.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 60.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 55.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 60.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 57.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.11 | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.11 | $0.10 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.09 | $0.11 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.12 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.12 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.12 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.12 | ||
| 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 | $38.6M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $40.8M | $43.1M |
| Total Assets | $42.6M | $64.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $38.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $25.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $43.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $40.8M | $43.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $40.9M | $43.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $43.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $43.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $43.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $43.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $43.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | $64.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $42.6M | $62.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $42.7M | $60.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $67.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $65.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $67.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $70.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $68.8M |
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 | $-251.0K | $1.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-282.0K | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -22.2% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.4% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 0.99× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $1.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-251.0K | $4.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-815.0K | $1.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-282.0K | $4.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -22.2% | 246.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -74.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 208.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 53.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.4% | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.2% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.99× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 4.39× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.16× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.87× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.86× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.78× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.88× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.91× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
