vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Byrna Technologies Inc. (BYRN) and PACIFIC BIOSCIENCES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. (PACB). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
PACIFIC BIOSCIENCES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($44.6M vs $35.2M, roughly 1.3× Byrna Technologies Inc.). Byrna Technologies Inc. runs the higher net margin — 9.5% vs -90.4%, a 100.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Byrna Technologies Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (26.0% vs 13.8%). Byrna Technologies Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($8.1M vs $-19.9M). Over the past eight quarters, Byrna Technologies Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (45.5% CAGR vs 7.3%).
Byrna Technologies Inc. designs, manufactures and markets innovative less-lethal personal safety and self-defense products, including handheld kinetic launchers, specialized non-lethal projectiles and related accessories. Its core customer segments cover individual consumers, law enforcement agencies, private security firms and educational institutions, with primary markets across North America and expanding global distribution networks.
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.
BYRN vs PACB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $35.2M | $44.6M |
| Net Profit | $3.4M | $-40.4M |
| Gross Margin | 59.8% | 37.1% |
| Operating Margin | 11.2% | -92.3% |
| Net Margin | 9.5% | -90.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 26.0% | 13.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -65.2% | -1802.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.14 | $-0.11 |
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 | $35.2M | $44.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $28.2M | $38.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $28.5M | $39.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $26.2M | $37.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $28.0M | $39.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $20.9M | $40.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $20.3M | $36.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $16.7M | $38.8M |
| Q4 25 | $3.4M | $-40.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2M | $-38.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.4M | $-41.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7M | $-426.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.7M | $2.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0M | $-60.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.1M | $-173.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $17.0K | $-78.2M |
| Q4 25 | 59.8% | 37.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 60.1% | 41.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 61.6% | 36.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 60.8% | -3.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 62.8% | 25.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 62.4% | 25.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 62.0% | 16.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 57.9% | 29.1% |
| Q4 25 | 11.2% | -92.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.2% | -101.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.7% | -112.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | -1154.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.6% | -390.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.0% | -160.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.4% | -488.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.0% | -209.6% |
| Q4 25 | 9.5% | -90.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.9% | -98.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.5% | -105.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.3% | -1146.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.6% | 6.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.9% | -151.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.2% | -481.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.1% | -201.4% |
| Q4 25 | $0.14 | $-0.11 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.09 | $-0.13 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.10 | $-0.14 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.07 | $-1.44 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.42 | $-0.44 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.04 | $-0.22 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.09 | $-0.64 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.00 | $-0.29 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $15.5M | $279.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $65.8M | $5.3M |
| Total Assets | $84.5M | $784.1M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $15.5M | $279.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.0M | $298.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $314.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $19.3M | $343.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $25.7M | $389.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $20.1M | $471.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $24.8M | $509.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $24.2M | $561.9M |
| Q4 25 | $65.8M | $5.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $63.1M | $36.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $60.1M | $61.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $56.8M | $91.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $54.4M | $506.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $44.5M | $453.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $45.3M | $492.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $43.2M | $649.0M |
| Q4 25 | $84.5M | $784.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $78.6M | $803.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $825.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $71.0M | $860.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $71.9M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $59.0M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $57.5M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $52.7M | $1.7B |
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 | $9.9M | $-19.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $8.1M | $-19.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 23.1% | -44.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.1% | 1.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.95× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-9.2M | $-114.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $9.9M | $-19.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.3M | $-18.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-5.5M | $-29.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-3.8M | $-44.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.3M | $-30.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.4M | $-45.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.9M | $-54.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.9M | $-75.7M |
| Q4 25 | $8.1M | $-19.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-4.5M | $-18.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.4M | $-29.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-6.4M | $-45.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.3M | $-32.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.1M | $-46.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4M | $-55.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.8M | $-79.6M |
| Q4 25 | 23.1% | -44.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -16.0% | -48.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -22.4% | -75.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -24.5% | -122.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.5% | -82.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -10.0% | -115.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.0% | -154.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 22.6% | -205.0% |
| Q4 25 | 5.1% | 1.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.0% | 0.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.3% | 1.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.1% | 3.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.4% | 4.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.3% | 2.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.6% | 4.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.0% | 10.0% |
| Q4 25 | 2.95× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.01× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.25× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.27× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.75× | -12.93× | ||
| Q3 24 | -1.36× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.93× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 231.88× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
BYRN
| E Commerce | $23.0M | 65% |
| Wholesale Dealerdistributors | $10.9M | 31% |
| Other | $1.3M | 4% |
PACB
| Products | $39.0M | 87% |
| Service And Other | $5.7M | 13% |
