vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Guardforce AI Co., Ltd. (GFAI) and Verastem, Inc. (VSTM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Guardforce AI Co., Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($18.0M vs $11.2M, roughly 1.6× Verastem, Inc.). Guardforce AI Co., Ltd. runs the higher net margin — -76.9% vs -876.3%, a 799.4% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Guardforce AI Co., Ltd. is a global provider of AI-integrated security solutions. Its core offerings include intelligent surveillance systems, AI-powered access control, autonomous security robots, and smart logistics monitoring services, serving enterprise, retail, financial and public sector clients across Asia, Europe and North America.
Verastem, Inc., doing business as Verastem Oncology, is an American pharmaceutical company that develops medicines to treat certain cancers. Headquartered and founded in Boston, Massachusetts, the firm is a member of NASDAQ Biotechnology Index.
GFAI vs VSTM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2023 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $18.0M | $11.2M |
| Net Profit | $-13.8M | $-98.5M |
| Gross Margin | 12.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | -66.1% | -362.2% |
| Net Margin | -76.9% | -876.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 6.3% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | -118.5% | -311.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-4.35 | $-1.35 |
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.
| Q3 25 | — | $11.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $18.0M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $16.9M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | $-98.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-25.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-24.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-8.3M | ||
| Q2 23 | $-13.8M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-6.3M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | 12.0% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 11.5% | — |
| Q3 25 | — | -362.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -2047.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -182.8% | ||
| Q2 23 | -66.1% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | -32.8% | — |
| Q3 25 | — | -876.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -1213.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -82.6% | ||
| Q2 23 | -76.9% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | -37.4% | — |
| Q3 25 | — | $-1.35 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.62 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.60 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.31 | ||
| Q2 23 | $-4.35 | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-7.16 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $24.7M | $137.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $25.0M | $-15.5M |
| Total Assets | $64.1M | $176.9M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | $137.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $164.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $113.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $83.4M | ||
| Q2 23 | $24.7M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $7.7M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $40.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $40.3M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | $-15.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $36.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $11.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $18.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | $25.0M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $29.4M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | $176.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $196.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $126.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $105.7M | ||
| Q2 23 | $64.1M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $68.8M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.66× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.14× | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
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 | $-1.0M | $-36.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | $-36.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-32.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-23.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-27.6M | ||
| Q2 23 | $-1.0M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-13.8M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-27.6M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -275.8% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
