vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Cryoport, Inc. (CYRX) and SolarMax Technology, Inc. (SMXT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
SolarMax Technology, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($46.6M vs $45.5M, roughly 1.0× Cryoport, Inc.). SolarMax Technology, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -1.9% vs -17.5%, a 15.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, SolarMax Technology, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (623.5% vs 9.6%).
Cryoport, Inc. is a global provider of specialized temperature-controlled logistics and supply chain solutions focused on the life sciences, biopharmaceutical, and cell and gene therapy sectors. It partners with research institutions, biotech firms, and pharmaceutical manufacturers globally to support the safe transport of sensitive biological materials including clinical trial samples and advanced therapy products.
SolarMax Technology, Inc. develops, manufactures and sells high-efficiency solar PV modules and clean energy systems. It serves residential, commercial and industrial clients in North America and key Asia-Pacific markets, offering installation and after-sales support to boost low-carbon energy use.
CYRX vs SMXT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $45.5M | $46.6M |
| Net Profit | $-8.0M | $-872.2K |
| Gross Margin | 47.8% | 2.7% |
| Operating Margin | -17.0% | -2.7% |
| Net Margin | -17.5% | -1.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 9.6% | 623.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | 57.4% | 77.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.19 | $-0.02 |
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 | $45.5M | $46.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $44.2M | $30.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $45.5M | $6.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $41.0M | $6.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $41.5M | $6.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $38.3M | $6.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $39.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $37.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-8.0M | $-872.2K | ||
| Q3 25 | $-6.9M | $-2.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $105.2M | $-1.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-12.0M | $-1.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-18.7M | $-3.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $805.0K | $-9.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-78.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-18.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | 47.8% | 2.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 48.2% | 3.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 47.0% | 8.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 45.4% | 20.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 47.0% | 14.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 45.5% | 19.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 44.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 40.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | -17.0% | -2.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | -22.5% | -6.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -21.2% | -25.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -23.1% | -16.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -30.7% | -27.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -34.9% | -158.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | -196.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -46.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | -17.5% | -1.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -15.7% | -7.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 231.4% | -27.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -29.2% | -18.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -45.1% | -60.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.1% | -152.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -196.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -50.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | $-0.19 | $-0.02 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.18 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.05 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.28 | $-0.03 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.42 | $-0.07 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.02 | $-0.21 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.62 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.43 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $411.2M | $8.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $502.6M | $-12.2M |
| Total Assets | $765.0M | $91.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $411.2M | $8.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $421.3M | $5.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $426.0M | $1.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $244.0M | $6.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $250.6M | $7.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $259.4M | $8.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $414.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $438.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | $502.6M | $-12.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $513.3M | $-11.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $519.1M | $-15.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $398.8M | $-15.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $401.9M | $-15.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $418.6M | $-10.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $400.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $472.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | $765.0M | $91.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $774.3M | $58.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $773.9M | $38.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $699.8M | $38.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $703.5M | $38.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $701.8M | $43.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $852.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $942.8M | — |
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 | $919.0K | $-2.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-4.5M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -10.0% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 12.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-25.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $919.0K | $-2.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2M | $3.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.3M | $220.7K | ||
| Q1 25 | $-4.3M | $-601.1K | ||
| Q4 24 | $-5.5M | $-1.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $447.0K | $203.6K | ||
| Q2 24 | $-8.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-3.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-4.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-11.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-7.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-10.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-3.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-11.8M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-7.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | -10.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -25.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -18.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -25.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -9.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -29.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -19.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 12.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.1% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.07× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.56× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CYRX
Segment breakdown not available.
SMXT
| Yabucoa | $35.9M | 77% |
| Other | $10.7M | 23% |
