vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ASSEMBLY BIOSCIENCES, INC. (ASMB) and CHAIN BRIDGE BANCORP INC (CBNA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
CHAIN BRIDGE BANCORP INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($14.7M vs $10.8M, roughly 1.4× ASSEMBLY BIOSCIENCES, INC.). CHAIN BRIDGE BANCORP INC runs the higher net margin — 36.4% vs -85.2%, a 121.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. CHAIN BRIDGE BANCORP INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($11.5M vs $-15.2M).
Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. is an American biotechnology company founded in 2004 that develops and manufactures systems for gene sequencing and some novel real time biological observation. PacBio has two principal sequencing platforms: single-molecule real-time sequencing (SMRT), based on the properties of zero-mode waveguides and sequencing by binding (SBB) chemistry, which uses native nucleotides and scarless incorporation for DNA binding and extension.
CHAIN BRIDGE BANCORP INCCBNAEarnings & Financial Report
Suburban Bancorp, Inc. was a publicly traded multibank holding company headquartered in suburban Chicago. It was founded by Gerald F. Fitzgerald, father of former U.S. Senator Peter Fitzgerald, and majority owned by the Fitzgerald family. Bank of Montreal acquired Suburban Bancorp, Inc. by merger in 1994. Harris Bankmont, Inc., an American subsidiary of Bank of Montreal, merged with Suburban Bankcorp to expand the Harris Bank presence in the Chicago area. The all-stock deal was valued at $246...
ASMB vs CBNA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $10.8M | $14.7M |
| Net Profit | $-9.2M | $5.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -100.9% | 45.6% |
| Net Margin | -85.2% | 36.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 57.6% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 4.3% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.72 | $0.81 |
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 | — | $14.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.8M | $13.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.6M | $12.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.4M | $14.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.8M | $16.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $5.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-9.2M | $4.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-10.2M | $4.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-8.8M | $5.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.6M | $7.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-11.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-9.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 45.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -100.9% | 44.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -115.2% | 45.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -105.5% | 48.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -160.1% | 56.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -143.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -185.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 36.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | -85.2% | 35.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -105.9% | 36.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -93.6% | 38.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -140.4% | 44.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -130.7% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -156.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.81 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.72 | $0.72 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.33 | $0.70 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.17 | $0.85 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.51 | $1.64 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.98 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.66 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $22.5M | $586.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $182.7M | $169.2M |
| Total Assets | $240.0M | $1.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $586.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.5M | $395.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $24.0M | $377.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.4M | $629.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $38.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $28.5M | $639.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $18.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $169.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $182.7M | $163.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.1M | $156.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $27.1M | $151.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $33.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $26.0M | $104.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $34.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $32.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $240.0M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $80.8M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $119.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $100.3M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $115.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $119.9M | — |
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 | $-15.1M | $15.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-15.2M | $11.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -140.7% | 78.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.4% | 28.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 2.92× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $17.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $15.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-15.1M | $2.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-16.8M | $3.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-23.4M | $3.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-51.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-15.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-17.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-18.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $11.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-15.2M | $2.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-51.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-17.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-18.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 78.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | -140.7% | 18.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 20.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 9.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -695.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -200.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -317.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 28.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.4% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.0% | 6.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.0% | 11.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.92× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.59× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.73× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.55× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
