vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CapsoVision, Inc (CV) and Li Bang International Corp Inc. (LBGJ). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Li Bang International Corp Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.7M vs $3.5M, roughly 1.3× CapsoVision, Inc). Li Bang International Corp Inc. runs the higher net margin — -23.9% vs -223.9%, a 200.0% gap on every dollar of revenue.
CapsoVision, Inc. is a medical technology firm specializing in the development and manufacturing of advanced capsule endoscopy systems and supporting diagnostic solutions. Its non-invasive gastrointestinal imaging products are supplied to hospitals, gastroenterology clinics and medical specialists across global markets, supporting more accurate detection of digestive diseases and improved patient care experiences.
Li & Fung Limited is a Hong Kong–based supply chain management company. Established in 1906, the company became publicly traded in 1973 and has since played a significant role in manufacturing apparel, toys, and various consumer goods for major North American and European retailers. Significant growth occurred after its public listing, reaching a peak market capitalization in 2011, but the rise of platforms like Alibaba and Amazon, which directly connect manufacturers with consumers, created ...
CV vs LBGJ — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.5M | $4.7M |
| Net Profit | $-7.9M | $-1.1M |
| Gross Margin | 54.1% | 17.8% |
| Operating Margin | -226.7% | -25.1% |
| Net Margin | -223.9% | -23.9% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.17 | $-0.06 |
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.
| Q3 25 | $3.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.7M |
| Q3 25 | $-7.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-4.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-1.1M |
| Q3 25 | 54.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 54.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 17.8% |
| Q3 25 | -226.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -140.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -25.1% |
| Q3 25 | -223.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -139.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -23.9% |
| Q3 25 | $-0.17 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.02 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.06 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $10.2M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $20.4M | $7.8M |
| Total Assets | $25.7M | $28.8M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 1.31× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $10.2M |
| Q3 25 | $20.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-139.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $7.8M |
| Q3 25 | $25.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $28.8M |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.31× |
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 | $-5.7M | $258.4K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-5.7M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -160.5% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.3% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | $-5.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-9.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $258.4K |
| Q3 25 | $-5.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-9.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | -160.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -289.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CV
| Products | $2.5M | 71% |
| Other | $1.0M | 29% |
LBGJ
Segment breakdown not available.
