vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of ENANTA PHARMACEUTICALS INC (ENTA) and Valens Semiconductor Ltd. (VLN). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
ENANTA PHARMACEUTICALS INC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($18.6M vs $17.3M, roughly 1.1× Valens Semiconductor Ltd.). Valens Semiconductor Ltd. runs the higher net margin — -42.2% vs -64.1%, a 21.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, ENANTA PHARMACEUTICALS INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (9.8% vs 8.1%). Valens Semiconductor Ltd. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-4.9M vs $-11.8M).
Enanta Pharmaceuticals Inc is a clinical-stage biotechnology company that develops innovative antiviral therapies for infectious diseases including hepatitis B virus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and SARS-CoV-2. It operates primarily in the U.S. and global markets, partnering with pharmaceutical firms to advance its small molecule drug candidate pipeline for patients with unmet medical needs.
Valens Semiconductor (Valens) is an Israeli fabless manufacturing company providing semiconductors for the automotive and audio-video industries. Valens provides semiconductor products for the distribution of uncompressed ultra-high-definition (UHD) multimedia content and in-vehicle connectivity applications. The company is a member of the MIPI Alliance and developed the first-to-market chipset that is compliant with the MIPI A-PHY standard. Valens invented the technology behind the HDBaseT s...
ENTA vs VLN — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $18.6M | $17.3M |
| Net Profit | $-11.9M | $-7.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | 63.0% |
| Operating Margin | -60.5% | -46.4% |
| Net Margin | -64.1% | -42.2% |
| Revenue YoY | 9.8% | 8.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 46.4% | 29.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.42 | $-0.07 |
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 | $18.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.1M | $17.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $18.3M | $17.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $14.9M | $16.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.6M | $16.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.0M | $13.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $17.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-11.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-18.7M | $-7.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-18.3M | $-7.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-22.6M | $-8.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-22.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-28.8M | $-10.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-22.7M | $-8.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-31.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 63.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 63.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 62.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 56.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 61.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -60.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -121.6% | -46.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -103.2% | -43.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -164.3% | -56.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | -138.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -204.4% | -76.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -134.6% | -69.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -192.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | -64.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -123.6% | -42.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -99.7% | -42.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -151.7% | -49.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | -131.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -197.3% | -64.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -126.1% | -65.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -182.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | $-0.42 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.88 | $-0.07 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.85 | $-0.07 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.06 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.05 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.36 | $-0.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.07 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.47 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $37.4M | $93.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $126.6M | $108.8M |
| Total Assets | $329.5M | $136.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $37.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $32.3M | $93.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $44.8M | $102.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $60.2M | $112.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $84.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $37.2M | $133.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $35.8M | $105.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $63.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | $126.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $64.7M | $108.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $79.3M | $116.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $93.5M | $128.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $111.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $128.8M | $147.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $148.9M | $153.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $166.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $329.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $280.7M | $136.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $301.0M | $144.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $323.0M | $154.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $348.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $376.7M | $171.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $398.8M | $175.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $413.6M | — |
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 | $-11.7M | $-4.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-11.8M | $-4.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -63.6% | -28.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.8% | 1.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-18.5M | $-11.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-11.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-6.5M | $-4.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.5M | $-211.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $-13.5M | $-7.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-16.8M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.4M | $3.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-14.8M | $-225.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $-28.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-11.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-7.9M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.4M | $-330.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $-16.0M | $-8.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-25.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-19.4M | $2.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-21.3M | $-460.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $-30.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | -63.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -52.5% | -28.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 94.7% | -1.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -107.4% | -47.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -150.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -132.5% | 14.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -118.6% | -3.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -177.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 9.6% | 1.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | 0.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 17.0% | 2.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 51.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 61.3% | 4.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 36.4% | 1.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 9.8% | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
