vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of DATA I/O CORP (DAIO) 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 $4.0M, roughly 1.2× DATA I/O CORP). Li Bang International Corp Inc. runs the higher net margin — -23.9% vs -69.0%, a 45.2% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Data I/O Corporation is a provider of manual and automated data programming and security provisioning systems for flash memory, microcontrollers, and logic devices. Founded in 1969 and incorporated in 1972, the company developed equipment that allowed electronic designers to program non-volatile semiconductor devices with data stored on punched cards or ASCII-encoded (eight-level) punched paper tape. These products were used for the design and manufacturing of systems used in industries such ...
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 ...
DAIO vs LBGJ — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.0M | $4.7M |
| Net Profit | $-2.8M | $-1.1M |
| Gross Margin | 43.0% | 17.8% |
| Operating Margin | -62.8% | -25.1% |
| Net Margin | -69.0% | -23.9% |
| Revenue YoY | -23.2% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | -132.7% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.29 | $-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.
| Q4 25 | $4.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.2M | $4.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-2.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-742.0K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-382.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.2M | $-1.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-307.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-797.0K | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-807.0K | — |
| Q4 25 | 43.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 50.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 49.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 51.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 52.2% | 17.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 53.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 54.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 52.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | -62.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -25.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -14.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -24.8% | -25.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | -6.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -11.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -14.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | -69.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -25.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -12.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -22.8% | -23.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -5.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -15.7% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -13.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | $-0.29 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.15 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.08 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.04 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.13 | $-0.06 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.03 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.09 | — |
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 | $13.5M | $7.8M |
| Total Assets | $20.2M | $28.8M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 1.31× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $10.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $13.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $17.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.6M | $7.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $19.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $19.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | $20.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $22.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $24.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $24.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $25.0M | $28.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $24.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $24.1M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $26.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.31× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $-1.7M | $258.4K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-1.9M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -46.6% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.2% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-2.8M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-1.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-343.0K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-342.0K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $109.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.6M | $258.4K | ||
| Q3 24 | $839.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-243.0K | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-41.0K | — |
| Q4 25 | $-1.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-348.0K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-633.0K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $53.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $724.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-268.0K | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-180.0K | — |
| Q4 25 | -46.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -6.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -10.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -33.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -5.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -3.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | 5.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.5% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.3% | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
DAIO
| Other | $2.1M | 53% |
| Adapter Sales | $1.9M | 47% |
LBGJ
Segment breakdown not available.
