vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of EKSO BIONICS HOLDINGS, INC. (EKSO) and Nauticus Robotics, Inc. (KITT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
EKSO BIONICS HOLDINGS, INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.1M vs $1.1M, roughly 3.0× Nauticus Robotics, Inc.). EKSO BIONICS HOLDINGS, INC. runs the higher net margin — -148.9% vs -1812.8%, a 1664.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Nauticus Robotics, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (124.4% vs -38.3%). EKSO BIONICS HOLDINGS, INC. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-4.5M vs $-5.0M). Over the past eight quarters, Nauticus Robotics, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (50.9% CAGR vs -8.6%).
Ekso Bionics Holdings Inc. is a company that develops and manufactures powered exoskeleton bionic devices that can be strapped on as wearable robots to enhance the strength, mobility, and endurance of industrial workers and people experiencing paralysis and mobility issues after a brain injury, stroke, multiple sclerosis (MS) or spinal cord injury. They enable individuals with any amount of lower extremity weakness, including those who are paralyzed, to stand up and walk.
Nauticus Robotics, Inc. develops and manufactures autonomous underwater robots, intelligent marine operation systems, and provides tailored robotic services for clients across offshore energy, maritime defense, and ocean scientific research sectors, with core markets covering North America and global coastal operation regions.
EKSO vs KITT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.1M | $1.1M |
| Net Profit | $-4.7M | $-19.2M |
| Gross Margin | 53.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | -143.6% | -531.0% |
| Net Margin | -148.9% | -1812.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -38.3% | 124.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | -36.9% | 77.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-3.01 | $-7.31 |
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 | $3.1M | $1.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.2M | $2.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1M | $2.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.4M | $165.3K | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.1M | $471.2K | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.1M | $370.2K | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.0M | $501.7K | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.8M | $464.4K |
| Q4 25 | $-4.7M | $-19.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.4M | $-6.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.7M | $-7.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.9M | $-7.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-3.4M | $-84.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.1M | $17.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-2.4M | $4.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-3.4M | $-72.8M |
| Q4 25 | 53.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 60.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 39.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 53.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 53.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 53.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 53.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 51.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | -143.6% | -531.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -33.2% | -297.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -193.2% | -307.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -101.9% | -3548.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -43.8% | -1312.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | -63.9% | -1504.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -47.2% | -1198.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -86.7% | -1195.1% |
| Q4 25 | -148.9% | -1812.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -33.6% | -335.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -131.7% | -359.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -85.7% | -4579.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -67.1% | -17940.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -50.2% | 4844.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -48.8% | 905.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | -91.3% | -15686.1% |
| Q4 25 | $-3.01 | $-7.31 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.54 | $-2.60 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.24 | $-0.26 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.12 | $-0.28 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-4.71 | $-267.45 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.53 | $-3.23 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.99 | $-1.12 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.20 | $-58.75 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.2M | $7.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $21.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $9.0M | $7.0M |
| Total Assets | $20.1M | $42.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 3.06× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $1.2M | $7.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.7M | $5.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.2M | $2.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $8.1M | $10.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.5M | $1.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.3M | $2.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.9M | $8.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.8M | $6.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $21.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $28.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $79.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $109.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $118.6M |
| Q4 25 | $9.0M | $7.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.7M | $-4.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.9M | $-5.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.7M | $1.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.7M | $-20.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.9M | $-66.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.1M | $-91.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $14.1M | $-112.8M |
| Q4 25 | $20.1M | $42.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $21.7M | $42.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.2M | $41.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $27.3M | $48.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $26.7M | $22.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $29.2M | $25.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $27.0M | $31.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $29.0M | $29.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | 3.06× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| 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 | $-4.3M | $-4.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-4.5M | $-5.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -141.9% | -470.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 4.0% | 86.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-12.0M | $-24.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-4.3M | $-4.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.1M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.4M | $-7.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.0M | $-6.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.4M | $-4.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.3M | $-5.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-2.7M | $-8.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-3.5M | $-6.7M |
| Q4 25 | $-4.5M | $-5.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.1M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.5M | $-7.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.0M | $-6.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.5M | $-4.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.3M | $-5.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-8.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-3.5M | $-7.0M |
| Q4 25 | -141.9% | -470.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | -49.0% | -249.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -169.4% | -354.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -58.5% | -4053.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -28.6% | -903.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -55.3% | -1402.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -1678.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -92.5% | -1504.1% |
| Q4 25 | 4.0% | 86.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.3% | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.9% | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.3% | 29.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.4% | 7.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.2% | 31.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.0% | 5.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.2% | 69.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -0.28× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -1.85× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
