vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ANAPTYSBIO, INC (ANAB) and HACKETT GROUP, INC. (HCKT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ANAPTYSBIO, INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($108.2M vs $75.8M, roughly 1.4× HACKETT GROUP, INC.). ANAPTYSBIO, INC runs the higher net margin — 45.8% vs 7.4%, a 38.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, ANAPTYSBIO, INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (151.1% vs -4.4%). Over the past eight quarters, ANAPTYSBIO, INC's revenue compounded faster (288.3% CAGR vs -0.9%).
AnaptysBio, Inc. is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on developing antibody-based immunotherapies for inflammatory diseases, immuno-oncology indications, and rare disease conditions. It primarily serves the U.S. market, advancing its innovative product candidate pipeline to address unmet medical needs via rigorous research and clinical development.
Hackett Limited is a British multi-channel retailer of clothing for men and boys, with a broad range of apparel and accessories. It was founded in 1983 in London, England. As of June 2019, the company had 160 stores globally, with its flagship store at 14 Savile Row in London. It is owned by both Lebanese holding company M1 Group and American L Capital Asia
ANAB vs HCKT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $108.2M | $75.8M |
| Net Profit | $49.6M | $5.6M |
| Gross Margin | — | 41.7% |
| Operating Margin | 61.8% | 12.0% |
| Net Margin | 45.8% | 7.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 151.1% | -4.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 327.8% | 56.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.64 | $0.20 |
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 | $108.2M | $75.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $76.3M | $73.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $22.3M | $78.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $27.8M | $77.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $43.1M | $79.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $30.0M | $79.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.0M | $77.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.2M | $77.2M |
| Q4 25 | $49.6M | $5.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.1M | $2.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-38.6M | $1.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-39.3M | $3.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-21.8M | $3.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-32.9M | $8.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-46.7M | $8.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-43.9M | $8.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | 41.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 40.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 35.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 35.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 39.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 29.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 27.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 26.2% |
| Q4 25 | 61.8% | 12.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 45.5% | 7.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -117.5% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -99.2% | 5.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -22.4% | 9.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -75.8% | 16.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -367.5% | 16.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | -587.8% | 14.9% |
| Q4 25 | 45.8% | 7.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.8% | 3.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -173.5% | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -141.6% | 4.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -50.5% | 4.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -109.4% | 10.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -425.3% | 11.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | -612.0% | 11.3% |
| Q4 25 | $1.64 | $0.20 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.52 | $0.09 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.34 | $0.06 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.28 | $0.11 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.63 | $0.11 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.14 | $0.31 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.71 | $0.31 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.64 | $0.32 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $238.2M | $18.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $37.2M | $68.1M |
| Total Assets | $364.4M | $206.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $238.2M | $18.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $109.8M | $13.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $44.3M | $10.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $98.6M | $9.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $123.1M | $16.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $191.6M | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $71.8M | $19.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $53.7M | $13.0M |
| Q4 25 | $37.2M | $68.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-29.4M | $101.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-44.7M | $119.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $34.0M | $114.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $70.9M | $115.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $84.4M | $110.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.9M | $102.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $47.8M | $93.5M |
| Q4 25 | $364.4M | $206.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $353.1M | $200.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $335.3M | $200.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $422.1M | $191.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $483.8M | $193.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $493.4M | $190.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $427.4M | $187.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $405.8M | $179.3M |
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 | $98.0M | $19.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $98.0M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 90.5% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.98× | 3.41× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $19.6M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $98.0M | $19.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-27.4M | $11.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-40.2M | $5.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.7M | $4.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-66.7M | $20.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.1M | $10.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-21.3M | $13.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-37.3M | $2.8M |
| Q4 25 | $98.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-27.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-40.3M | $3.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.7M | $2.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-66.9M | $19.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.1M | $9.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-21.4M | $12.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-37.3M | $1.8M |
| Q4 25 | 90.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -35.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -180.9% | 4.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -38.7% | 3.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | -155.3% | 24.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -33.7% | 11.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -194.6% | 16.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | -519.3% | 2.4% |
| Q4 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.2% | 2.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.1% | 2.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.6% | 1.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.1% | 1.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.3% | 1.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.4% | 1.2% |
| Q4 25 | 1.98× | 3.41× | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.81× | 4.47× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.40× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.33× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 5.79× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.23× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.57× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.32× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ANAB
Segment breakdown not available.
HCKT
| Global S And BT | $39.1M | 52% |
| Sap Solutions | $22.4M | 30% |
| Consulting And Software Support And Maintenance | $14.3M | 19% |
