vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Ceribell, Inc. (CBLL) and Fangdd Network Group Ltd. (DUO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Fangdd Network Group Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($28.4M vs $24.8M, roughly 1.1× Ceribell, Inc.). Fangdd Network Group Ltd. runs the higher net margin — -18.7% vs -54.6%, a 35.8% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Ceribell, Inc. develops and commercializes innovative portable neurodiagnostic medical devices, focused on rapid non-invasive electroencephalogram (EEG) solutions for seizure detection. Its core products serve hospital emergency departments, intensive care units, and long-term care facilities, with primary markets across North America and ongoing global expansion efforts.
Fangdd Network Group Ltd. operates a leading digital real estate service platform in China, offering property listing, transaction matching, home furnishing consultation and operational support for buyers, sellers, agents and real estate development enterprises across multiple domestic city tiers.
CBLL vs DUO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $24.8M | $28.4M |
| Net Profit | $-13.5M | $-5.3M |
| Gross Margin | 87.3% | 9.1% |
| Operating Margin | -58.9% | -35.3% |
| Net Margin | -54.6% | -18.7% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 47.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -322.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.35 | $-1.35 |
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 | $24.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $21.2M | $28.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $20.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $19.3M |
| Q4 25 | $-13.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-13.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-13.6M | $-5.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-12.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.4M |
| Q4 25 | 87.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 88.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 88.1% | 9.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 87.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 87.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 12.5% |
| Q4 25 | -58.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -64.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -70.5% | -35.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -69.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -57.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -49.0% |
| Q4 25 | -54.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -59.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -64.4% | -18.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -62.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -60.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 12.4% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.35 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.37 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.38 | $-1.35 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.36 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.85 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $159.3M | $24.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $155.3M | $53.1M |
| Total Assets | $195.8M | $94.8M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $159.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $168.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $177.4M | $24.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $182.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $18.9M |
| Q4 25 | $155.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $164.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $172.2M | $53.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $180.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-136.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $29.4M |
| Q4 25 | $195.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $199.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $207.7M | $94.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $213.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $47.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $92.7M |
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 | $-10.8M | $-3.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-11.0M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -44.2% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.7% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-41.6M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-10.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-11.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.5M | $-3.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-11.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-808.0K |
| Q4 25 | $-11.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-11.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-11.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-957.0K |
| Q4 25 | -44.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -50.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -35.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -56.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -5.0% |
| Q4 25 | 0.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -0.34× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CBLL
| Products | $18.8M | 76% |
| Subscription | $6.0M | 24% |
DUO
Segment breakdown not available.
