vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP) and PRECISION BIOSCIENCES INC (DTIL), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
PRECISION BIOSCIENCES INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($34.2M vs $864.0K, roughly 39.6× CRISPR Therapeutics AG). PRECISION BIOSCIENCES INC runs the higher net margin — -15117.2% vs 58.9%, a 15176.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, PRECISION BIOSCIENCES INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (5261.1% vs -97.6%). PRECISION BIOSCIENCES INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-11.3M vs $-93.1M). Over the past eight quarters, PRECISION BIOSCIENCES INC's revenue compounded faster (39.5% CAGR vs 30.9%).
CRISPR Therapeutics AG is a Swiss–American biotechnology company headquartered in Zug, Switzerland. The company does business as CRISPR Therapeutics, Inc. in the United States. It was one of the first companies formed to utilize the CRISPR gene editing platform to develop medicines for the treatment of various rare and common diseases. The company has approximately 500 employees and has offices in Zug, Switzerland, Boston, Massachusetts, San Francisco, California and London, United Kingdom. I...
Precision BioSciences, Inc. is a publicly traded American clinical stage gene editing company headquartered in Durham, North Carolina. Founded in 2006, Precision is focused on developing both in vivo and ex vivo gene editing therapies using its proprietary "ARCUS" genome editing platform.
CRSP vs DTIL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $864.0K | $34.2M |
| Net Profit | $-130.6M | $20.1M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -17912.5% | 36.6% |
| Net Margin | -15117.2% | 58.9% |
| Revenue YoY | -97.6% | 5261.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -250.1% | 213.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-1.32 | $2.62 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $864.0K | $34.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $889.0K | $13.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $892.0K | $18.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $865.0K | $29.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $35.7M | $638.0K | ||
| Q3 24 | $602.0K | $576.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $517.0K | $49.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $504.0K | $17.6M |
| Q4 25 | $-130.6M | $20.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-106.4M | $-21.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-208.5M | $-23.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-136.0M | $-20.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-37.3M | $-17.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-85.9M | $-16.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-126.4M | $32.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-116.6M | $8.6M |
| Q4 25 | -17912.5% | 36.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -14854.8% | -158976.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -25709.0% | -121538.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -17158.8% | -76248.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -181.0% | -3894.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | -18294.0% | -3693.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -29257.3% | 48.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -27894.2% | -23.8% |
| Q4 25 | -15117.2% | 58.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -11973.1% | -167476.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -23379.9% | -130666.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -15722.1% | -70913.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -104.5% | -2781.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -14276.1% | -2851.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -24450.3% | 65.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -23133.1% | 48.8% |
| Q4 25 | $-1.32 | $2.62 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.17 | $-1.84 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.40 | $-2.13 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.58 | $-2.21 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.41 | $-3.08 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.01 | $-2.25 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.49 | $4.67 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.43 | $1.70 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.0B | $115.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.9B | $92.2M |
| Total Assets | $2.3B | $154.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $2.0B | $115.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9B | $44.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $62.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.9B | $77.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | $86.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $101.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0B | $123.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | $137.8M |
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | $92.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.9B | $16.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $34.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8B | $49.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9B | $56.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.9B | $64.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0B | $74.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | $37.2M |
| Q4 25 | $2.3B | $154.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | $93.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.0B | $108.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.2B | $124.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.2B | $136.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.3B | $153.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.3B | $165.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.4B | $184.7M |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $-92.6M | $-11.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-93.1M | $-11.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -10772.0% | -32.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 59.8% | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | -0.56× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-345.9M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $-92.6M | $-11.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-84.6M | $-15.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-113.9M | $-20.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-53.9M | $-19.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-50.0M | $-18.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-106.9M | $-5.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-95.6M | $-14.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $109.8M | $-19.0M |
| Q4 25 | $-93.1M | $-11.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-84.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-114.0M | $-20.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-54.2M | $-19.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-50.3M | $-18.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-107.1M | $-6.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-96.3M | $-14.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $109.0M | $-19.1M |
| Q4 25 | -10772.0% | -32.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -9528.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -12779.9% | -112627.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -6260.5% | -65917.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -140.9% | -2943.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -17796.0% | -1033.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | -18624.6% | -29.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 21633.1% | -108.4% |
| Q4 25 | 59.8% | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.3% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 13.1% | 11.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 23.8% | 220.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.7% | 15.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 36.4% | 6.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 136.8% | 0.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 143.1% | 0.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.56× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -0.45× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -2.21× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
