vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ALLURION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (ALUR) and Moolec Science SA (MLEC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ALLURION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.6M vs $2.6M, roughly 1.4× Moolec Science SA). Moolec Science SA runs the higher net margin — -91.8% vs -167.0%, a 75.2% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Robinson Technologies is a Japanese video game developer founded by Seth Robinson. The company produced the BBS door games Legend of the Red Dragon, Planets: The Exploration of Space and Growtopia, an experimental multiplayer creative sandbox created as a collaboration with Hamumu Software, released in 2013 for iOS, Android, Microsoft Windows, and macOS.
Moolec Science SA is a global agricultural biotechnology and food technology company specializing in molecular farming. It uses engineered crop platforms to produce sustainable, cost-competitive animal-derived proteins for use in alternative meat, dairy products and food ingredients, serving food manufacturers, agribusinesses and consumer goods brands across North America, Europe and Latin America.
ALUR vs MLEC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.6M | $2.6M |
| Net Profit | $-6.0M | $-2.4M |
| Gross Margin | 44.5% | -25.5% |
| Operating Margin | -174.2% | -77.9% |
| Net Margin | -167.0% | -91.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -35.4% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 37.2% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.69 | $-0.06 |
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 | $3.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.6M | $2.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.8M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-6.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-11.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-9.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-9.6M | $-2.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | 44.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 49.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 73.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 74.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 45.3% | -25.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 58.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 76.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 73.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | -174.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -362.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -205.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -130.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -306.2% | -77.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -229.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -79.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -121.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | -167.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -447.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -276.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -26.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -171.8% | -91.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 162.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -70.7% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 21.3% | — |
| Q4 25 | $-0.69 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.53 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.28 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.31 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-3.22 | $-0.06 | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.40 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-4.34 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.96 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $5.4M | $1.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-77.2M | $2.8M |
| Total Assets | $15.8M | $31.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $5.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $20.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.4M | $1.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $28.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $29.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-77.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-82.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-64.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-69.8M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-78.0M | $2.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-64.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-70.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-66.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | $15.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $28.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $38.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $32.8M | $31.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $50.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $46.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $60.0M | — |
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 | $-5.3M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 4.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-5.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-6.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-9.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-13.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-11.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-8.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-11.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-9.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-8.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -214.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -79.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -93.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.0% | 4.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.7% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -1.31× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -4.33× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ALUR
| ES | $2.2M | 60% |
| Other | $1.5M | 40% |
MLEC
Segment breakdown not available.
