vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Smart Powerr Corp. (CREG) and SELLAS Life Sciences Group, Inc. (SLS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Smart Powerr Corp. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($88.8K vs $79.0K, roughly 1.1× SELLAS Life Sciences Group, Inc.). Smart Powerr Corp. runs the higher net margin — -529.4% vs -12108.9%, a 11579.4% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Smart Powerr Corp. (formerly China Recycling Energy Corp) is a specialized smart energy and energy efficiency solutions provider. Its core offerings include waste energy recovery systems, energy efficiency optimization services, and intelligent energy management platform deployment, primarily serving industrial, commercial and public sector clients in the Chinese market.
SELLAS Life Sciences Group, Inc. is a late-stage clinical biopharmaceutical company focused on developing innovative cancer immunotherapies for patients with unmet medical needs. Its core pipeline targets both hematological malignancies and solid tumors, with lead product candidates addressing indications like acute myeloid leukemia, primarily serving markets across North America.
CREG vs SLS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $88.8K | $79.0K |
| Net Profit | $-470.4K | $-9.6M |
| Gross Margin | 41.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | -691.5% | -12208.9% |
| Net Margin | -529.4% | -12108.9% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 22.5% | 13.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.03 | $-0.21 |
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 | $88.8K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $90.8K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $62.2K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $20.6K | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $79.0K |
| Q4 25 | $-470.4K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-300.4K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-884.5K | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-9.6M |
| Q4 25 | 41.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 48.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 42.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 42.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -691.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -235.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -1648.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -5635.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -12208.9% |
| Q4 25 | -529.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -330.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -2000.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4288.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -12108.9% |
| Q4 25 | $0.03 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.08 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.05 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-0.21 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $18.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $143.1M | $9.7M |
| Total Assets | $157.6M | $24.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $18.4M |
| Q4 25 | $143.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $118.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $116.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $114.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $9.7M |
| Q4 25 | $157.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $133.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $132.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $130.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $24.4M |
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 | $2.5M | $-10.8M |
| 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.
| Q4 25 | $2.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-53.0K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-131.3K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-10.8M |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
