vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Amprius Technologies, Inc. (AMPX) and KKR Real Estate Finance Trust Inc. (KREF). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
KKR Real Estate Finance Trust Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($25.8M vs $25.2M, roughly 1.0× Amprius Technologies, Inc.). Amprius Technologies, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -96.7% vs -101.7%, a 5.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Amprius Technologies, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (137.4% vs -26.6%). Over the past eight quarters, Amprius Technologies, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (228.7% CAGR vs -18.8%).
Amprius Technologies, Inc. develops and manufactures high-energy density lithium-ion batteries using proprietary silicon anode technology. It serves aerospace, defense, electric mobility, and portable electronics segments, offering products with longer runtime and faster charging than conventional alternatives.
KKR Real Estate Finance Trust Inc. is a specialized real estate finance firm sponsored by global investment firm KKR. It primarily originates, acquires, and manages a portfolio of senior secured commercial real estate loans, mostly backed by high-quality institutional commercial properties across the United States, delivering stable risk-adjusted returns to investors via interest income from its diversified assets.
AMPX vs KREF — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $25.2M | $25.8M |
| Net Profit | $-24.4M | $-26.2M |
| Gross Margin | 23.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | -100.9% | -105.1% |
| Net Margin | -96.7% | -101.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 137.4% | -26.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | -113.6% | -229.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.19 | $-0.49 |
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 | $25.2M | $25.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $21.4M | $25.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.1M | $30.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.3M | $31.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.6M | $35.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.9M | $37.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.3M | $40.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.3M | $39.1M |
| Q4 25 | $-24.4M | $-26.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-3.9M | $13.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.4M | $-29.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-9.4M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-11.4M | $20.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.8M | $-7.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-12.5M | $25.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-9.9M | $-3.1M |
| Q4 25 | 23.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -20.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -21.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -64.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -195.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -100.9% | -105.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | -21.9% | 50.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -45.2% | -101.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -85.7% | -18.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -110.6% | 55.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -143.3% | -19.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -386.6% | 63.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | -441.7% | -8.7% |
| Q4 25 | -96.7% | -101.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | -18.2% | 54.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -42.3% | -98.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -83.0% | -15.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -107.4% | 57.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -138.1% | -20.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -374.2% | 63.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -423.2% | -7.9% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.19 | $-0.49 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.03 | $0.12 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.05 | $-0.53 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.08 | $-0.15 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.11 | $0.22 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $-0.19 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.13 | $0.29 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.11 | $-0.13 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $90.5M | $84.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $103.8M | $1.2B |
| Total Assets | $156.9M | $6.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $90.5M | $84.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $73.2M | $204.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $54.2M | $107.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $48.4M | $106.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $55.2M | $104.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $35.0M | $108.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $46.4M | $107.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $39.0M | $106.5M |
| Q4 25 | $103.8M | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.2M | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $76.7M | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $70.4M | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $69.5M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $56.0M | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $65.1M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $59.9M | $1.4B |
| Q4 25 | $156.9M | $6.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $156.5M | $6.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $123.0M | $6.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $118.5M | $6.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $121.1M | $6.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $104.2M | $6.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $112.8M | $7.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $104.7M | $7.3B |
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 | $-3.5M | $72.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-5.9M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -23.2% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 9.3% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-35.5M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-3.5M | $72.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-9.2M | $18.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-4.3M | $21.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-14.1M | $15.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-6.1M | $132.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.5M | $49.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | $30.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-9.8M | $34.5M |
| Q4 25 | $-5.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-9.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-5.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-15.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-9.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-9.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-13.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | -23.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -45.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -33.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -133.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -91.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -138.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -285.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -585.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | 9.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 48.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 166.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.34× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 6.54× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.19× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
