vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Core Laboratories Inc. (CLB) and SILICOM LTD. (SILC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Core Laboratories Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($121.8M vs $61.9M, roughly 2.0× SILICOM LTD.). Core Laboratories Inc. runs the higher net margin — 4.2% vs -18.5%, a 22.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, SILICOM LTD. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (6.6% vs -1.4%). Core Laboratories Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($517.0K vs $-3.3M).
Abbott Laboratories, commonly known as Abbott, is an American multinational medical devices and health care company with headquarters in Abbott Park, Illinois. The company produces pharmaceuticals for sale outside the United States, diagnostic products, nutritional products, and medical devices.
Silicom Ltd. is a publicly traded company, headquartered in Israel, that specializes in the design, manufacture and marketing of connectivity solutions for a range of servers and server-based systems. Its shares are listed on the NASDAQ Global Market and on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange. Silicom is a member of the RAD Group family of companies.
CLB vs SILC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $121.8M | $61.9M |
| Net Profit | $5.1M | $-11.5M |
| Gross Margin | — | 30.6% |
| Operating Margin | 1.5% | -19.8% |
| Net Margin | 4.2% | -18.5% |
| Revenue YoY | -1.4% | 6.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 16.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.11 | $-2.01 |
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 | $121.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $138.3M | $61.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $134.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $130.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $123.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $129.2M | $58.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $134.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $130.6M | — |
| Q1 26 | $5.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.9M | $-11.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-154.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.4M | $-13.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 20.8% | 30.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 22.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 17.8% | 28.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 11.5% | -19.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 11.0% | -22.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.3% | — |
| Q1 26 | 4.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.6% | -18.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.7% | -23.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | $0.11 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.11 | $-2.01 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.30 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.22 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.00 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.15 | $-2.28 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.25 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.19 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $22.8M | $42.1M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $275.1M | $117.5M |
| Total Assets | $587.7M | $152.2M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $22.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $22.7M | $42.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $25.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $31.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $22.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.2M | $72.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $21.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.7M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $110.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $114.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $124.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $124.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $126.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $139.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $147.6M | — |
| Q1 26 | $275.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $266.0M | $117.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $271.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $261.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $253.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $246.6M | $127.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $250.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $240.3M | — |
| Q1 26 | $587.7M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $584.0M | $152.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $591.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $602.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $591.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $585.1M | $150.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $600.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $597.8M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.41× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.42× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.48× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.49× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.51× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.56× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.61× | — |
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 | $4.0M | $-2.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $517.0K | $-3.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 0.4% | -5.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.77× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $22.5M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $4.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.9M | $-2.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $20.6M | $18.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.1M | — |
| Q1 26 | $517.0K | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.0M | $-3.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.4M | $17.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $10.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.3M | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.6% | -5.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.4% | 29.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.1% | 1.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.5% | 1.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.77× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.61× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.60× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.31× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.78× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.12× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.90× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
