vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ASSEMBLY BIOSCIENCES, INC. (ASMB) and Recon Technology, Ltd (RCON). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Recon Technology, Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($12.2M vs $10.8M, roughly 1.1× ASSEMBLY BIOSCIENCES, INC.). Recon Technology, Ltd runs the higher net margin — -6.8% vs -85.2%, a 78.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Recon Technology, Ltd posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (111.0% vs 57.6%).
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.
Recon Instruments Inc. was a Canadian technology company that produced smartglasses and wearable displays marketed by the company as "heads-up displays" for sports. Recon's products delivered live activity metrics, GPS maps, and notifications directly to the user's eye. Recon's first heads-up display offering was released commercially in October 2010, roughly a year and a half before Google introduced Google Glass.
ASMB vs RCON — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $10.8M | $12.2M |
| Net Profit | $-9.2M | $-832.7K |
| Gross Margin | — | 33.5% |
| Operating Margin | -100.9% | -14.6% |
| Net Margin | -85.2% | -6.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 57.6% | 111.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 4.3% | 70.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.72 | $-0.09 |
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 | — | $12.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.4M | $5.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $8.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $-832.7K | ||
| Q3 25 | $-9.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-10.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-8.8M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-2.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-11.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-9.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 33.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 31.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -14.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -100.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -115.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -105.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -63.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -160.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -143.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -185.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -6.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -85.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -105.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -93.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -48.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -140.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -130.7% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -156.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.09 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.72 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.33 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.17 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.31 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.51 | — | ||
| 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 | $10.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $182.7M | $66.4M |
| Total Assets | $240.0M | $77.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $10.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $24.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $38.3M | $19.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $28.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $19.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $18.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $66.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $182.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $27.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $33.4M | $66.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $26.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $34.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $32.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $77.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $240.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $80.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $119.2M | $74.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $100.3M | — | ||
| 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 | $-1.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-15.2M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -140.7% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.4% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $-1.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-15.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-16.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-23.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-51.1M | $-1.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-15.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-17.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-18.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-15.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-51.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-17.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-18.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -140.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -695.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -200.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -317.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.2% | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
