vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Firefly Aerospace Inc. (FLY) and Orange County Bancorp, Inc. (OBT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Orange County Bancorp, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($33.0M vs $30.8M, roughly 1.1× Firefly Aerospace Inc.). Orange County Bancorp, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 37.6% vs -433.5%, a 471.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Firefly Aerospace Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (37.6% vs 20.6%). Orange County Bancorp, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($41.3M vs $-62.0M).
Firefly Aerospace, Inc. (Firefly) is an American aerospace firm based in Cedar Park, Texas. Firefly develops small- and medium-lift launch vehicles for commercial launches to orbit. Firefly's stated purpose is to increase access to space, similar to other private spaceflight companies.
Orange County Bancorp, Inc. is a Delaware-registered bank holding company operating mainly in New York, U.S. It offers a full range of retail and commercial banking services, including deposit accounts, loans and wealth management solutions, serving individual consumers, small and mid-sized corporate clients in its regional footprint.
FLY vs OBT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $30.8M | $33.0M |
| Net Profit | $-133.4M | $12.4M |
| Gross Margin | 27.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | -202.1% | 41.4% |
| Net Margin | -433.5% | 37.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 37.6% | 20.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | -227.1% | 73.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-1.50 | $0.94 |
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 | — | $33.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $30.8M | $33.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.5M | $32.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $28.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $27.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $22.4M | $27.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $21.1M | $27.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $25.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $12.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-133.4M | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-63.8M | $10.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $8.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $7.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-40.8M | $3.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-53.5M | $8.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $9.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 27.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 25.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 34.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 41.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | -202.1% | 38.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -349.5% | 41.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 40.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 32.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -152.9% | 14.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -232.1% | 36.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 45.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | 37.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -433.5% | 29.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -410.2% | 32.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 31.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 26.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -182.3% | 11.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -253.7% | 29.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 36.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.94 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.50 | $0.75 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-5.78 | $0.87 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.77 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.64 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-3.57 | $0.28 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-4.60 | $0.73 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.82 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $995.2M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $948.8M | $284.4M |
| Total Assets | $1.3B | $2.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $995.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $205.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $26.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $21.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $136.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $284.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $948.8M | $270.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-918.0M | $252.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $201.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $185.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-665.5M | $193.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-620.0M | $177.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $168.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $466.8M | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.5B |
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 | $-53.0M | $43.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-62.0M | $41.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -201.3% | 125.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 29.0% | 7.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 3.53× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $69.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $43.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-53.0M | $30.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-5.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $34.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $10.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $9.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $41.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-62.0M | $29.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-5.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $32.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $9.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 125.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | -201.3% | 87.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -17.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 15.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 120.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 36.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 32.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 7.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | 7.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.0% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 6.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | 3.53× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.01× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -0.47× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.56× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 4.83× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.19× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.13× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.24× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FLY
| Spacecraft Solutions Revenue | $21.4M | 69% |
| Launch Revenue | $9.4M | 31% |
OBT
Segment breakdown not available.
