vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Monte Rosa Therapeutics, Inc. (GLUE) and OP Bancorp (OPBK). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
OP Bancorp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($24.3M vs $12.8M, roughly 1.9× Monte Rosa Therapeutics, Inc.). On growth, Monte Rosa Therapeutics, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (38.5% vs 13.7%). Monte Rosa Therapeutics, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($99.8M vs $23.4M).
Monte Rosa Therapeutics is a clinical-stage biotechnology company specializing in the discovery and development of targeted molecular glue degrader therapies. Its pipeline addresses unmet medical needs across oncology, rare genetic disorders and immunological diseases, with operations focused on advancing novel treatments for global patient populations.
OP Bancorp is the bank holding company for Open Bank, a community-oriented commercial bank headquartered in California, United States. It provides a full range of banking solutions including deposit accounts, commercial real estate loans, small business financing, and consumer lending products, primarily catering to small and medium-sized enterprises, local immigrant communities, and retail clients across Southern California.
GLUE vs OPBK — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $12.8M | $24.3M |
| Net Profit | $-27.1M | — |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -258.3% | 39.2% |
| Net Margin | -212.1% | — |
| Revenue YoY | 38.5% | 13.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | -13.5% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.48 |
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 | — | $24.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.8M | $24.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.2M | $23.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $84.9M | $22.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $60.6M | $21.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $20.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $20.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $19.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-27.1M | $6.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-12.3M | $6.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $46.9M | $5.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.4M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $5.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $5.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $5.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 39.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -258.3% | 39.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -67.1% | 35.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 51.9% | 34.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.4% | 31.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 36.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 37.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 37.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -212.1% | 27.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -53.0% | 26.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 55.2% | 25.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 26.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 26.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 26.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.48 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.45 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.42 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.37 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.33 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.36 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.36 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $0.34 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $208.3M | $167.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $245.8M | $227.9M |
| Total Assets | $459.8M | $2.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $167.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $208.3M | $166.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $69.4M | $205.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $78.5M | $198.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $224.3M | $134.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $166.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $127.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $139.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $227.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $245.8M | $221.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $268.1M | $213.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $275.2M | $210.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $222.9M | $205.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $203.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $195.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $194.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $459.8M | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $359.6M | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $393.2M | $2.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $438.7M | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.2B |
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 | $100.4M | $26.2M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $99.8M | $23.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 781.5% | 96.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.1% | 11.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $145.0M | $43.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $26.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $100.4M | $23.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-34.7M | $-7.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-45.5M | $5.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $128.9M | $31.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $13.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $15.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-3.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $23.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $99.8M | $23.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-36.4M | $-7.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-47.1M | $4.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $128.7M | $29.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $12.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $15.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-3.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 96.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 781.5% | 95.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -157.0% | -32.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -55.4% | 19.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 212.3% | 139.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 61.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 77.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -16.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | 11.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.1% | 2.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.3% | 3.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.9% | 6.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.3% | 7.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.57× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -1.10× | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.97× | 1.02× | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.59× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.45× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.90× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -0.60× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
