vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Genasys Inc. (GNSS) and Sol-Gel Technologies Ltd. (SLGL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Sol-Gel Technologies Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($17.3M vs $17.1M, roughly 1.0× Genasys Inc.). Sol-Gel Technologies Ltd. runs the higher net margin — 67.3% vs -4.8%, a 72.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Sol-Gel Technologies Ltd. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (217.7% vs 145.9%).
Genasys Inc. is based in San Diego, California. Its long-range acoustic device (LRAD) products are used for long-range acoustic hailing and mass notification. Its software-as-a-service products Genasys Protect and Evertel are used for zone-based multi-channel communication and secure messaging and collaboration, respectively. Genasys Acoustics are integrated speakers used to send long range voice broadcasts. The company was previously named American Technology Corporation (ATC) until 2010 and...
Sol-Gel Technologies Ltd. is a specialty biopharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing innovative dermatology treatments. Leveraging its proprietary sol-gel delivery technology, it creates topical therapies for common skin conditions including acne, rosacea and atopic dermatitis, with primary markets across North America and Europe, partnering with established healthcare firms to expand product reach.
GNSS vs SLGL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $17.1M | $17.3M |
| Net Profit | $-817.0K | $11.6M |
| Gross Margin | 48.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | -2.1% | 65.1% |
| Net Margin | -4.8% | 67.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 145.9% | 217.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 80.0% | 487.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.02 | $4.17 |
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 | $17.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $17.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $9.9M | $17.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.2M | $5.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-817.0K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-1.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.5M | $11.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-6.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-4.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-11.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-6.7M | $2.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-6.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | 48.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 50.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 37.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 45.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 40.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 52.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 37.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | -2.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -60.1% | 65.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -90.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -85.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -105.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -74.8% | 29.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -121.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | -4.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -8.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -65.8% | 67.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -88.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -58.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -168.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -93.2% | 36.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -120.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | $-0.02 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.03 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.14 | $4.17 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.14 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.26 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.15 | $0.71 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.16 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $10.3M | $24.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.8M | $31.9M |
| Total Assets | $67.6M | $39.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $10.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.5M | $24.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.7M | $26.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2M | $31.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $8.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $28.5M | $34.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $34.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $67.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $63.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $57.4M | $39.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $49.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $54.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $53.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $59.4M | $42.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $51.0M | — |
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 | $7.2M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $7.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-5.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-6.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $947.0K | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $556.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-7.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-6.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-5.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-6.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $878.0K | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $526.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-7.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-6.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 14.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -59.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -93.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 12.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 7.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -105.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -118.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.1% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.2% | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GNSS
| Hardware | $14.8M | 87% |
| Software | $2.3M | 13% |
SLGL
Segment breakdown not available.
