vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of BingEx Ltd (FLX) and HUTCHMED (China) Ltd (HCM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
HUTCHMED (China) Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($270.8M vs $143.2M, roughly 1.9× BingEx Ltd). BingEx Ltd runs the higher net margin — 2.2% vs 0.7%, a 1.5% gap on every dollar of revenue.
HUTCHMED (China) LtdHCMEarnings & Financial Report
HUTCHMED (China) Ltd is a biopharmaceutical firm focused on discovering, developing and commercializing targeted and immunotherapies for oncology and immunological diseases. It operates across China and global markets, with multiple marketed oncology drugs and a robust pipeline of late-stage clinical candidates addressing unmet patient needs.
FLX vs HCM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $143.2M | $270.8M |
| Net Profit | $3.2M | $2.0M |
| Gross Margin | 10.8% | 37.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | -13.2% |
| Net Margin | 2.2% | 0.7% |
| Revenue YoY | — | -16.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -83.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.00 |
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.
| Q1 26 | $143.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $270.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $141.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $143.0M | $277.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $141.0M | $324.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $164.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $305.7M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $532.9M |
| Q1 26 | $3.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.5M | $455.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $27.6M | $11.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $25.8M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $168.6M |
| Q1 26 | 10.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 37.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.0% | 0.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.0% | 48.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 41.1% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 0.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -13.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.9% | -1.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -5.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -9.0% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 21.0% |
| Q1 26 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.2% | 163.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.6% | 3.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 8.4% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 31.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $0.00 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.52 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.01 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.03 | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $0.19 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $561.1M | $1.4B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $93.2M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $1.2B |
| Total Assets | $1.3B | $1.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.08× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $561.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $628.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $499.4M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $592.4M | $836.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $517.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $802.5M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $856.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $93.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $93.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $82.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $82.1M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $40.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $759.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $740.1M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $782.0M |
| Q1 26 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $926.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $1.3B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.08× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.08× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.11× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.11× | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 0.05× |
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 | — | $8.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $3.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 1.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.8% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 4.21× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-96.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $8.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-72.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $40.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-39.8M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $226.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $3.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-82.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $32.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-49.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $202.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -29.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 10.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -16.3% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 37.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 3.3% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 4.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 4.21× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -0.16× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.38× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -1.54× | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 1.34× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
