vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of High-Trend International Group (HTCO) and Stoke Therapeutics, Inc. (STOK). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Stoke Therapeutics, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($158.6M vs $99.4M, roughly 1.6× High-Trend International Group). Stoke Therapeutics, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 71.2% vs -13.4%, a 84.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Stoke Therapeutics, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (3661.1% vs 185.2%). Stoke Therapeutics, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($131.7M vs $6.5M).
Motor Trend Group, LLC is a media company that specializes in enthusiast brands, such as Motor Trend and Hot Rod. Headquartered in El Segundo, California, it was a subsidiary of the TNT Sports division of Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) until being sold to Hearst Communications in 2024.
Stoke Therapeutics, Inc. is a clinical-stage biotechnology company developing innovative RNA-targeted therapies for severe rare genetic diseases. Its lead candidates address unmet needs for Dravet syndrome, a rare epilepsy, and other neurological monogenic disorders, serving patients across North America and global markets.
HTCO vs STOK — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $99.4M | $158.6M |
| Net Profit | $-13.3M | $112.9M |
| Gross Margin | 4.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | -12.5% | 70.2% |
| Net Margin | -13.4% | 71.2% |
| Revenue YoY | 185.2% | 3661.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -1624.0% | 528.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-3.29 | $1.90 |
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.
| Q2 25 | $99.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $158.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $22.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $34.9M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-2.5M |
| Q2 25 | $-13.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $112.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-10.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-771.7K | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-30.7M |
| Q2 25 | 4.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.0% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | -12.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 70.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -60.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.4% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 1340.7% |
| Q2 25 | -13.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 71.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -46.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.2% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 1235.6% |
| Q2 25 | $-3.29 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.90 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.15 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.37 | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-0.69 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $13.2M | $274.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.0M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $21.2M | $350.1M |
| Total Assets | $41.7M | $406.9M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.05× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $13.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $274.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $128.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.4M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $192.1M |
| Q2 25 | $1.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | $21.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $350.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $229.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-5.3M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $190.2M |
| Q2 25 | $41.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $406.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $271.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.4M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $256.9M |
| Q2 25 | 0.05× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
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 | $6.5M | $131.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $6.5M | $131.7M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 6.6% | 83.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.0% | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.17× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $6.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $131.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-23.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-3.5M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-21.8M |
| Q2 25 | $6.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $131.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-23.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | $-22.6M |
| Q2 25 | 6.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 83.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -102.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | 912.5% |
| Q2 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | -33.8% |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.17× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
