vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Canterbury Park Holding Corp (CPHC) and STANDARD BIOTOOLS INC. (LAB). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
STANDARD BIOTOOLS INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($19.6M vs $12.4M, roughly 1.6× Canterbury Park Holding Corp). Canterbury Park Holding Corp runs the higher net margin — -3.1% vs -177.4%, a 174.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Canterbury Park Holding Corp posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (3.9% vs -11.5%). Canterbury Park Holding Corp produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-611.3K vs $-23.1M). Over the past eight quarters, Canterbury Park Holding Corp's revenue compounded faster (-6.0% CAGR vs -12.2%).
Canterbury Park, is a horse racing track in Shakopee, Minnesota, United States. Canterbury Park Holding Corporation hosts parimutuel wagering on live thoroughbred and quarter horse racing at its facilities in Shakopee and parimutuel wagering on races held at out-of-state racetracks that are simulcast to the racetrack. In addition, the Canterbury Park Card Casino operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and is also regulated by the Minnesota Racing Commission. Casino games include blackjack...
Standard BioTools Inc., previously known as Fluidigm Corp., is an American life science tools company that offers analytical mass cytometry systems for flow cytometry and tissue imaging, along with associated assays and reagents, as well as an automated genomic analysis instrument and a variety of microfluidic arrays, or integrated fluidic circuits (IFCs), and consumables with fully kitted reagents. Custom assays and services are available with all systems and applications.
CPHC vs LAB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $12.4M | $19.6M |
| Net Profit | $-390.1K | $-34.7M |
| Gross Margin | — | 48.5% |
| Operating Margin | 2.6% | -168.5% |
| Net Margin | -3.1% | -177.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 3.9% | -11.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | 68.7% | -28.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.08 | $-0.09 |
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 | $12.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.3M | $19.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.7M | $21.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.1M | $40.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $19.3M | $22.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $16.2M | $22.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $14.1M | $45.5M |
| Q4 25 | $-390.1K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $487.3K | $-34.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-327.4K | $-33.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-299.2K | $-26.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.0M | $-26.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $338.3K | $-45.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $998.2K | $-32.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 48.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 48.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 48.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 54.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 46.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 53.1% |
| Q4 25 | 2.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.7% | -168.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.8% | -118.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.9% | -80.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.9% | -120.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.9% | -134.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 12.5% | -132.2% |
| Q4 25 | -3.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.7% | -177.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -2.1% | -153.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.3% | -63.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -10.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.5% | -122.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.1% | -203.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.1% | -70.6% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.08 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.10 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.06 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.06 | $-0.07 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.25 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.40 | $-0.07 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.07 | $-0.12 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.20 | $-0.27 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $17.1M | $129.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $83.9M | $399.7M |
| Total Assets | $112.6M | $539.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $17.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.7M | $129.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $16.9M | $158.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $15.4M | $150.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $21.7M | $210.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $23.8M | $269.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $25.2M | $287.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $55.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $55.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $55.0M |
| Q4 25 | $83.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $84.1M | $399.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $83.6M | $424.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $83.7M | $454.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $84.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $85.2M | $489.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $83.2M | $510.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $82.7M | $577.3M |
| Q4 25 | $112.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $114.4M | $539.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $114.9M | $557.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $112.4M | $579.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $109.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $114.2M | $681.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $111.4M | $708.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $105.6M | $777.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.11× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.11× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.10× |
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 | $-103.4K | $-22.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-611.3K | $-23.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -4.9% | -118.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 4.1% | 4.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $4.7M | $-111.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-103.4K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2M | $-22.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.4M | $-20.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.4M | $-30.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-2.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.3M | $-27.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.4M | $-39.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.6M | $-62.5M |
| Q4 25 | $-611.3K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-395.3K | $-23.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2M | $-22.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.5M | $-35.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-6.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-25 | $-30.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.8M | $-41.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-601.0K | $-63.3M |
| Q4 25 | -4.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.2% | -118.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.5% | -103.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.1% | -86.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -55.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.0% | -136.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.1% | -182.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -4.3% | -138.9% |
| Q4 25 | 4.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.0% | 4.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.5% | 8.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | 12.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 32.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.8% | 10.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.2% | 8.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | 15.7% | 1.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.56× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.12× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.95× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.62× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CPHC
| Casino | $9.5M | 76% |
| Other | $1.9M | 15% |
| Food And Beverage | $1.0M | 8% |
LAB
| Consumables | $8.7M | 45% |
| Services And Other Revenue | $5.8M | 29% |
| Instruments | $5.1M | 26% |
