vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Cytek Biosciences, Inc. (CTKB) and Namib Minerals (NAMM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Cytek Biosciences, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($62.1M vs $41.9M, roughly 1.5× Namib Minerals). Namib Minerals produced more free cash flow last quarter ($7.4M vs $-1.8M).
Cytek Biosciences, Inc. develops, manufactures and sells high-performance flow cytometry systems, associated reagents and analysis software. Its solutions serve life science research, clinical diagnostics and biopharmaceutical sectors, with a global customer base across North America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region.
Namib Minerals is a Namibia-based natural resources firm focused on exploration, development and extraction of high-demand mineral deposits including uranium, copper and lithium. It operates across licensed southern African sites, supplying raw materials to global clean energy, construction and electronics manufacturing sectors.
CTKB vs NAMM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $62.1M | $41.9M |
| Net Profit | $-44.1M | — |
| Gross Margin | 52.9% | 45.7% |
| Operating Margin | -9.0% | 29.8% |
| Net Margin | -70.9% | — |
| Revenue YoY | 8.1% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | -557.1% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | — |
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 | $62.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $52.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $45.6M | $41.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $41.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $57.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $51.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $46.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $44.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-44.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-5.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-5.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-11.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $941.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-10.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-6.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | 52.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 52.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 52.3% | 45.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 48.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 58.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 56.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 54.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 51.3% | — |
| Q4 25 | -9.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -17.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -23.3% | 29.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -36.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -8.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -18.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -23.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | -70.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -10.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -12.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -27.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -22.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -13.8% | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $90.9M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $341.7M | — |
| Total Assets | $461.5M | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $90.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $93.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $75.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $95.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $98.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $162.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $177.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $168.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | $341.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $378.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $377.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $379.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $395.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $385.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $389.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $392.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | $461.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $494.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $493.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $482.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $499.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $491.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $483.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $492.1M | — |
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 | $-771.0K | $11.4M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-1.8M | $7.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -2.9% | 17.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.6% | 9.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-8.8M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-771.0K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-3.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $108.0K | $11.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-125.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-1.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-4.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.5M | $7.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-974.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | -2.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -8.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.2% | 17.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.6% | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.5% | 9.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.3% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.21× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.05× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CTKB
| Products | $46.6M | 75% |
| Services | $15.5M | 25% |
NAMM
Segment breakdown not available.
