vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of BIOHARVEST SCIENCES INC. (BHST) and GULF RESOURCES, INC. (GURE). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
GULF RESOURCES, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($9.0M vs $8.4M, roughly 1.1× BIOHARVEST SCIENCES INC.).
BioHarvest Sciences Inc. is a biotechnology firm that develops and produces sustainable, high-purity plant-derived bioactive ingredients. It serves the nutraceutical, cosmetics, and pharmaceutical sectors, leveraging proprietary cell cultivation technology to create efficacious natural products without large-scale agricultural farming.
EOG Resources, Inc. is an American energy company engaged in hydrocarbon exploration. It is organized in Delaware and headquartered in the Heritage Plaza building in Houston, Texas.
BHST vs GURE — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $8.4M | $9.0M |
| Net Profit | — | $-35.7M |
| Gross Margin | 60.3% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -3.7% |
| Net Margin | — | -394.3% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 303.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -921.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | — |
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.
| Q3 25 | $8.4M | $9.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.1M | $8.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.0M | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $6.9M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $5.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $8.0M |
| Q3 25 | — | $-35.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-773.8K | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-58.8M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-1.8M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-681.8K |
| Q3 25 | 60.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 60.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 58.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 8.5% |
| Q3 25 | — | -3.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -9.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -114.7% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -39.1% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -11.5% |
| Q3 25 | — | -394.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -9.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -855.6% | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -30.3% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -8.5% |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $107.5M |
| Total Assets | — | $131.9M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $72.2M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | $107.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $142.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $205.2M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $260.7M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $260.3M |
| Q3 25 | — | $131.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $164.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $226.7M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $278.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $278.3M |
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 | — | $6.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | $6.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-559.3K | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-42.6M | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-1.1M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $6.2M |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | $-16.3M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $6.2M |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | -277.7% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 77.0% |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | 258.3% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 0.2% |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BHST
Segment breakdown not available.
GURE
| Bromine | $8.1M | 89% |
| Shandong Shouguang Shenrunfa Marine Chemical Company Limited | $1.4M | 15% |
