vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Amber International Holding Ltd (AMBR) and Moolec Science SA (MLEC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Moolec Science SA is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.6M vs $1.9M, roughly 1.4× Amber International Holding Ltd). Amber International Holding Ltd runs the higher net margin — 87.5% vs -91.8%, a 179.4% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Amber International Holding LtdAMBREarnings & Financial Report
Amber Road, Inc. (NYSE: AMBR) was a US-based software company specializing in Global Trade Management (GTM) solutions. It was acquired by E2open in 2019.
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.
AMBR vs MLEC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.9M | $2.6M |
| Net Profit | $1.6M | $-2.4M |
| Gross Margin | 39.9% | -25.5% |
| Operating Margin | 1.5% | -77.9% |
| Net Margin | 87.5% | -91.8% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.02 | $-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.
| Q2 25 | $1.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.6M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $1.7M |
| Q2 25 | $1.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-2.4M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-1.6M |
| Q2 25 | 39.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -25.5% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | 12.7% |
| Q2 25 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -77.9% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -130.3% |
| Q2 25 | 87.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -91.8% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -91.4% |
| Q2 25 | $0.02 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.06 | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-0.04 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $25.8M | $1.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $91.3M | $2.8M |
| Total Assets | $248.2M | $31.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $25.8M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.9M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $853.6K |
| Q2 25 | $91.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.8M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $8.9M |
| Q2 25 | $248.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $31.4M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $22.5M |
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 | $-4.1M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 4.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -2.49× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $-4.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-1.7M |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-1.8M |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -106.2% |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 4.4% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | 6.0% |
| Q2 25 | -2.49× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
