vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of BRANDYWINE REALTY TRUST (BDN) and PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. (PBYI). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
BRANDYWINE REALTY TRUST is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($127.0M vs $75.5M, roughly 1.7× PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC.). On growth, PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (27.7% vs 4.5%). Over the past eight quarters, PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC.'s revenue compounded faster (31.3% CAGR vs 0.7%).
Brandywine Realty Trust is a Philadelphia-based real estate investment trust (REIT) that invests in office buildings in Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and Austin, Texas.
Puma Biotechnology is a publicly traded biopharmaceutical company headquartered in Los Angeles, CA.
BDN vs PBYI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $127.0M | $75.5M |
| Net Profit | $-48.8M | — |
| Gross Margin | — | 69.3% |
| Operating Margin | 1.2% | 22.7% |
| Net Margin | -38.4% | — |
| Revenue YoY | 4.5% | 27.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | -80.4% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.28 | $0.26 |
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 | $127.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $121.0M | $75.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $121.4M | $54.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $120.6M | $52.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $121.5M | $46.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $121.9M | $59.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $131.8M | $80.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $125.3M | $47.1M |
| Q1 26 | $-48.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-36.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-25.9M | $8.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-88.7M | $5.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-27.0M | $3.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-44.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-165.2M | $20.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $30.2M | $-4.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 61.3% | 69.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 62.6% | 77.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 62.4% | 76.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 60.8% | 77.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 61.2% | 76.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 64.9% | 63.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 63.1% | 77.4% |
| Q1 26 | 1.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 22.8% | 22.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.8% | 17.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -34.3% | 12.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.5% | 8.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 18.0% | 22.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -7.2% | 27.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.5% | -4.6% |
| Q1 26 | -38.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -30.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -21.3% | 16.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -73.5% | 11.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -22.2% | 6.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -36.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -125.4% | 25.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 24.1% | -9.6% |
| Q1 26 | $-0.28 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.21 | $0.26 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.15 | $0.17 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.51 | $0.12 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.16 | $0.06 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.25 | $0.40 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.96 | $0.41 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.17 | $-0.09 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $36.2M | $97.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $22.7M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $130.3M |
| Total Assets | $3.6B | $216.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.17× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $36.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $32.3M | $97.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $75.5M | $94.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $122.6M | $96.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $29.4M | $93.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $90.2M | $101.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $36.5M | $96.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $30.4M | $96.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.6B | $22.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.3B | $34.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.3B | $45.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.2B | $56.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.2B | $68.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.3B | $79.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2B | $90.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $792.7M | $130.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $841.5M | $115.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $879.8M | $104.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $993.6M | $97.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.0B | $92.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $71.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $48.5M |
| Q1 26 | $3.6B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.6B | $216.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.3B | $202.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.4B | $194.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.4B | $196.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.5B | $213.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.6B | $220.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.8B | $205.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.23× | 0.17× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.70× | 0.30× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.63× | 0.43× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.23× | 0.58× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.13× | 0.74× | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.06× | 1.12× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.73× | 1.87× |
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 | — | $14.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $14.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 19.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $41.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $116.7M | $14.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $47.5M | $9.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $34.4M | $14.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.3M | $3.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $181.1M | $15.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $52.2M | $11.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $48.2M | $1.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $14.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $9.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $14.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $15.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $11.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 19.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 17.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 26.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 26.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 13.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.10× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.41× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.21× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.54× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.60× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BDN
| Rents | $120.7M | 95% |
| Third party management fees, labor reimbursement and leasing | $4.7M | 4% |
PBYI
Segment breakdown not available.
