vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Bark, Inc. (BARK) and LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP (LSCC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($145.8M vs $98.4M, roughly 1.5× Bark, Inc.). LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP runs the higher net margin — -5.2% vs -8.8%, a 3.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (9.3% vs -22.1%). LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP produced more free cash flow last quarter ($44.0M vs $1.6M). Over the past eight quarters, LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP's revenue compounded faster (8.4% CAGR vs -10.0%).
Flying Bark Productions Pty. Ltd. is an Australian entertainment and animation studio that is a subsidiary of Belgian production company Studio 100. The studio acts as a full-service production facility across feature films, television and an assorted range of digital content. The studio was established by Yoram and Sandra Gross in 1967 as Yoram Gross Film Studios, and its stake was acquired by Australian media group Village Roadshow in 1996 before their stake was sold to German media & enter...
Lattice Semiconductor Corporation is an American semiconductor company specializing in the design and manufacturing of low power field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). Headquartered in the Silicon Forest area of Hillsboro, Oregon, the company also has operations in San Jose, Calif., Shanghai, Manila, Penang, and Singapore. Lattice Semiconductor has more than 1000 employees and an annual revenue of more than $660 million as of 2022. The company was founded in 1983 and went public in 1989. It ...
BARK vs LSCC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $98.4M | $145.8M |
| Net Profit | $-8.6M | $-7.6M |
| Gross Margin | 62.5% | 68.5% |
| Operating Margin | -9.1% | 30.7% |
| Net Margin | -8.8% | -5.2% |
| Revenue YoY | -22.1% | 9.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 24.9% | 14.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.05 | $-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.
| Q1 26 | — | $145.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $98.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $107.0M | $133.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $102.9M | $124.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $115.4M | $120.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $126.4M | $117.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $126.1M | $127.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $116.2M | $124.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | $-7.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-8.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-10.7M | $2.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.0M | $2.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-6.1M | $5.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-11.5M | $16.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-5.3M | $7.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-10.0M | $22.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | 68.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 62.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 57.9% | 67.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 62.3% | 68.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 63.6% | 68.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 62.7% | 61.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 60.4% | 69.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 63.0% | 68.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q4 25 | -9.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -10.0% | -1.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -8.1% | 3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -5.7% | 5.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -9.7% | -10.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | -4.5% | 5.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -9.1% | 18.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | -5.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | -8.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -10.0% | 2.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.8% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -5.3% | 4.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -9.1% | 14.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | -4.2% | 5.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -8.6% | 18.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | $-0.06 | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.05 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.06 | $0.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.04 | $0.02 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.03 | $0.04 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.07 | $0.12 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.03 | $0.05 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.06 | $0.16 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $21.7M | $133.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $0 | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $81.2M | $714.1M |
| Total Assets | $188.7M | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.00× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $133.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | $21.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $63.4M | $117.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $84.7M | $107.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $94.0M | $127.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $115.3M | $136.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $115.2M | $124.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $117.8M | $109.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $42.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $42.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $40.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $40.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $714.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $81.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $86.5M | $706.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $94.0M | $687.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.5M | $707.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $113.0M | $710.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $123.6M | $703.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $128.1M | $698.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | $883.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $188.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $248.0M | $844.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $260.0M | $808.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $260.6M | $823.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $292.2M | $843.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $301.6M | $853.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $287.7M | $827.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.43× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.38× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.32× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.31× | — |
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 | $1.7M | $57.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.6M | $44.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 1.6% | 30.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.1% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-36.5M | $153.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $57.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-18.1M | $47.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-5.4M | $38.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.3M | $31.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.4M | $45.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8M | $44.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8M | $21.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | $44.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-19.9M | $34.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.1M | $31.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-12.0M | $23.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-2.0M | $39.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $966.0K | $39.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-251.0K | $14.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | 30.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -18.6% | 25.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -6.0% | 25.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -10.4% | 19.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | -1.6% | 33.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.8% | 31.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.2% | 11.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.7% | 9.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.7% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.5% | 7.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.5% | 4.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.4% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.8% | 5.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 16.86× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 13.23× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 6.35× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 6.12× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.97× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BARK
| Toys Accessories | $46.0M | 47% |
| Consumables | $30.2M | 31% |
| Commerce Segment | $18.9M | 19% |
| Other | $3.4M | 3% |
LSCC
Segment breakdown not available.
